Compared to both of you I am a complete lightweight
I may be the lightest lightweight I know. I average 24 oz. of coffee and two cans of soda a day. If I have more than that I get pretty dysfunctional--irritable, nervous, sleepless. If I quit, I have one day of headaches and nausea followed by many days of sluggishness and cravings. I can't say how many days, since I always fall off the wagon.
I find that I really can't write code without caffeine anymore. Maybe I never could. It makes me sad to think that I need a stimulant to do my job, but there it is...
TFA has many comments on its own page that agree with you, saying that this is a non issue. Of course, all of those people can already speak English, or else they wouldn't have been able to read the article. The millions of programmers who only speak Russian, Chinese, Japanese, German, etc. are unlikely to chime in here to argue against you. You probably didn't have a conversation just last week with a developer who only speaks Korean.
I'm only sort of disagreeing. If I were a non-English speaking programmer with the time and resources to learn English, I probably would. I'm just saying that its hard to have a useful discussion about this, since the people most likely to have opposing views can't understand what we're saying.
It doesn't have the Windows key, which is one more reason for me to like it.
It is unfortunate that the Windows key is branded the way it is, but it's actually pretty useful. (Assuming you run windows, which you probably don't.)
Mostly I use Windows+e to open a file explorer, and Windows+r to open the "run" dialog. Several times a day I type Windows+r, then "calc", allowing me to do math without reaching for the mouse.
This sort of functionality is best with a key reserved for the operating system (or at least the window manager) to use for its own purposes. Since Ctrl, Alt, and Shift mostly belong to applications, a fourth meta key is desirable.
The sentence isn't made any more profound, important or meaningful - no extra information is conveyed - by using faddish terms like "leverage"; designed exclusively to make MBAs sound like they have something to contribute (they usually don't).
Normally I'd agree with you on this sort of thing, but I don't think "leverage" and "use" are equivalent here. To me, "leverage" implies that they are taking advantage of a tool that applies more force than some other, simpler, tool. Metaphorically, this is exactly the point they are making--Nehalem can do more than its predecessors, and Apple is using that advantage. This seems like a case where reasonable people could disagree.
The Mathematical Theory of Communication
by Claude E Shannon, Warren Weaver
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0252725484
It was ground-breaking in its time and continues to be interesting today. It is also short, clearly written and introduces a way of thinking that is useful for all kinds of problem spaces. Randomly picking up this book was part of what convinced me to go back to school for a CS degree.
Yeah, because everyone calculates the $20 per year savings that one TV has over another and takes that into their voluntary decision of which to buy.
If the labeling was clear enough, I think they would take it into account.
Legislation that mandates clear, consistent labels allowing consumers to make informed decisions about their own costs seems more reasonable than legislating forbidding the sale of a whole class of products. I'm no free market fanboy, but this seems like a case where the self interest of consumers is directly in line with the goal of reduced energy consumption. The only thing missing is good information.
Making this sort of decision really requires more technical details than you provided in the summary or the linked article.
If you do choose to make custom modifications to Rails (or any other third party dependency in your system), make them very carefully. Keep notes about what you changed, and why. Comment the modified source code with a consistent, searchable tag, like
// MYCOMPANY Begin custom changes // Optimized this block for queries where the // search string is only one word long, and // measured a 20% performance increase on the // production server under moderate load. // 3-Jan-2009 ... // MYCOMPANY End custom changes
Also, check the third party source into your own version control system so that you can track the changes explicitly.
Since you are talking about making changes for performance reasons, be sure to follow good optimization practices. Measure first, optimize only the true bottlenecks. Measure under realistic scenarios. If optimizations are even slightly confusing or subtle, comment them thoroughly. Keep the original, unoptimized code, maybe just in comments next to the new code, or maybe in a separate "reference implementation" function so that you can fall back to a known reliable version.
The world is full of people struggling to get by. Computers have invaded their lives, without them asking for it. Sure, they realize those machines are powerful, and are increasingly essential, but they don't really like them. Nevertheless, they pony up the cash and get one. They try to make it work, but sometimes it just doesn't. Now they feel frustrated, confused, and maybe even cheated. So they call for help, and get you on the line.
I mean, don't you as the car user have a responsibility to 1/2 know what you are doing with the thing? And futhermore, wouldn't you -as a human being- want to know a little about it since you have to use it? Otherwise, why do you have it?
I mean, don't you as a technical support professional have a responsibility to help them? And furthermore, wouldn't you -as a human being- want to help them? Otherwise, why did you take this job?
At the root of the problem, is that liking computers and liking people are a very rare combination. I don't mean liking your friends. I mean liking to talk to strangers on the phone who have very different worldviews from your own--getting a thrill from making their lives better. This makes it very hard to fill tech support positions with people who are both competent and happy. (Don't get me wrong. By this definition, I don't like people either. That's why I am a programmer.)
While I am frustrated, I pose these as very serious questions: why don't more users take an interest in educating themselves about something that is going to be more plentiful vs less plentiful in the future? It'd be like being around in 1910 and writing off electricity as "too hard" and thus ignoring the next 20 years of electricity development. I don't get it -- but it is definitely the norm from what I observe.
I'll take you at your word that your questions are serious, and try to give serious answers.
The world is a big place, with lots of valuable things to learn. Time is scarce, intellects are imperfect, and interests vary. It's almost 2010, and all I know about electricity is how to plug stuff in and how to call an electrician. I know very little about accounting, tax law, or financial investment and have no plans to learn even though they would be useful. I expect to see more solar power, but don't plan to learn much about it, even if I buy a house that uses it.
I make my living with computers because of the happy coincidence that I like them and I can get paid for it. The people you are railing against are your customers. Whether directly or indirectly, they are paying you money to know things so that they don't have to. Their time is apparently better spent being dentists or trapeeze artists. Aren't you glad you don't have to learn to do those things? Despite what you say, I think that auto-mechanics are a perfect analogy. Sometimes I ask my mechanic stupid questions, but he smiles and takes my money. We're both largely satisfied with the arrangement.
Maybe I'm just getting old and losing my sense of humor, but it seems like these "ha ha users are dumb" stories get less and less funny. As the audience for personal computing continues to grow, the number of senile, mentally ill or simply ignorant users will also grow. Mocking them leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
...the horrors that must lie waiting within the source code for Lotus Notes.
Schools could use the Notes source to teach the basics of how to build slow, confusing, fragile applications with utterly non-standard user interfaces. Notes is by far the worst piece of software I use regularly. On the other hand, opening its source would let me fix that bug that keeps reminding me I missed the same meeting reminders over and over again.
The basic idea behind Interclue would make for a handy Web utility, but seems too slight to build a business around.
To rephrase: If your product isn't valuable enough for people to spend money on, it will be hard to make money selling it. The rest of the article is a fairly well-written review of an obscure add-on, with very little insight about open vs. proprietary software.
fruey sends in a
New Scientist analysis
that questions the Long Tail theory.
The theory,
first described in
Wired,
describes how retailers with low stocking and distribution
costs can profit by selling a large number of unique products to
very small niche markets. But the four studies summarized in
the article examine different markets and conclude that this
business model may be harder to exploit than originally expected.
In fact, the importance of blockbuster products which are
sold to an enormous number of buyers may be growing rather than shrinking.
One possible reason is that recommendation services, like those
provided my Amazon and Netflix, may concentrate interest on a
few items and take market share away from the niche items.
Effective C++, Scott Meyers -- I own the 2nd Edition, but there may be a newer one. This is the best book I've seen for really making sense out of C++. It is well-organized, covers its chosen topics thoroughly, and is fun to read.
she's dead wrong. this is a fundamental RIGHT, or should be considered as such.
Her words:
Everybody should have the right to it, but it's not something one wants to encourage.
I think you actually agree with each other on the primary point. You haven't made it clear where you stand on her more subtle point: does anonymity, which we all agree is essential, also have unfortunate negative side-effects? I'd say it does. Anonymity removes all incentive not to behave anti-socially. Anti-social behavior isn't always bad, but quite often it degrades the benefits of society.
I'm just curious: what exactly are you automating, and why? Is this just a toy for geek house, or do you see this as something everyone will be doing before long? How much are you developing yourself, and how much are you using commercial components?
Slashdot Mirror
Compared to both of you I am a complete lightweight
I may be the lightest lightweight I know. I average 24 oz. of coffee and two cans of soda a day. If I have more than that I get pretty dysfunctional--irritable, nervous, sleepless. If I quit, I have one day of headaches and nausea followed by many days of sluggishness and cravings. I can't say how many days, since I always fall off the wagon.
I find that I really can't write code without caffeine anymore. Maybe I never could. It makes me sad to think that I need a stimulant to do my job, but there it is...
Workplace web bludging 'good for productivity'
allwords.com tells me that "to bludge" is to avoid responsibility. What a great word. Is it used outside Australia?
TFA has many comments on its own page that agree with you, saying that this is a non issue. Of course, all of those people can already speak English, or else they wouldn't have been able to read the article. The millions of programmers who only speak Russian, Chinese, Japanese, German, etc. are unlikely to chime in here to argue against you. You probably didn't have a conversation just last week with a developer who only speaks Korean.
I'm only sort of disagreeing. If I were a non-English speaking programmer with the time and resources to learn English, I probably would. I'm just saying that its hard to have a useful discussion about this, since the people most likely to have opposing views can't understand what we're saying.
It doesn't have the Windows key, which is one more reason for me to like it.
It is unfortunate that the Windows key is branded the way it is, but it's actually pretty useful. (Assuming you run windows, which you probably don't.)
Mostly I use Windows+e to open a file explorer, and Windows+r to open the "run" dialog. Several times a day I type Windows+r, then "calc", allowing me to do math without reaching for the mouse.
This sort of functionality is best with a key reserved for the operating system (or at least the window manager) to use for its own purposes. Since Ctrl, Alt, and Shift mostly belong to applications, a fourth meta key is desirable.
The sentence isn't made any more profound, important or meaningful - no extra information is conveyed - by using faddish terms like "leverage"; designed exclusively to make MBAs sound like they have something to contribute (they usually don't).
Normally I'd agree with you on this sort of thing, but I don't think "leverage" and "use" are equivalent here. To me, "leverage" implies that they are taking advantage of a tool that applies more force than some other, simpler, tool. Metaphorically, this is exactly the point they are making--Nehalem can do more than its predecessors, and Apple is using that advantage. This seems like a case where reasonable people could disagree.
Linux always works great. The problem is humans suck at telling computers what to do.
Fix that for ya.
And that was in the 50s, so with the inflation, you can only guess how heavy the fine would be now.
$88,046.89
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=10000&year1=1950&year2=2009
Just sayin.
The Mathematical Theory of Communication by Claude E Shannon, Warren Weaver
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0252725484
It was ground-breaking in its time and continues to be interesting today. It is also short, clearly written and introduces a way of thinking that is useful for all kinds of problem spaces. Randomly picking up this book was part of what convinced me to go back to school for a CS degree.
People must be warned.
Supposedly Stallman doesn't surf the web - he sends an email with a URL and the email is returned with the page...
Also, he sends the email using nothing but butterflies, which should work equally well from a cruise ship.
Yeah, because everyone calculates the $20 per year savings that one TV has over another and takes that into their voluntary decision of which to buy.
If the labeling was clear enough, I think they would take it into account.
Legislation that mandates clear, consistent labels allowing consumers to make informed decisions about their own costs seems more reasonable than legislating forbidding the sale of a whole class of products. I'm no free market fanboy, but this seems like a case where the self interest of consumers is directly in line with the goal of reduced energy consumption. The only thing missing is good information.
Making this sort of decision really requires more technical details than you provided in the summary or the linked article.
If you do choose to make custom modifications to Rails (or any other third party dependency in your system), make them very carefully. Keep notes about what you changed, and why. Comment the modified source code with a consistent, searchable tag, like
Also, check the third party source into your own version control system so that you can track the changes explicitly.
Since you are talking about making changes for performance reasons, be sure to follow good optimization practices. Measure first, optimize only the true bottlenecks. Measure under realistic scenarios. If optimizations are even slightly confusing or subtle, comment them thoroughly. Keep the original, unoptimized code, maybe just in comments next to the new code, or maybe in a separate "reference implementation" function so that you can fall back to a known reliable version.
Let's turn the argument around a little.
The world is full of people struggling to get by. Computers have invaded their lives, without them asking for it. Sure, they realize those machines are powerful, and are increasingly essential, but they don't really like them. Nevertheless, they pony up the cash and get one. They try to make it work, but sometimes it just doesn't. Now they feel frustrated, confused, and maybe even cheated. So they call for help, and get you on the line.
I mean, don't you as the car user have a responsibility to 1/2 know what you are doing with the thing? And futhermore, wouldn't you -as a human being- want to know a little about it since you have to use it? Otherwise, why do you have it?
I mean, don't you as a technical support professional have a responsibility to help them? And furthermore, wouldn't you -as a human being- want to help them? Otherwise, why did you take this job?
At the root of the problem, is that liking computers and liking people are a very rare combination. I don't mean liking your friends. I mean liking to talk to strangers on the phone who have very different worldviews from your own--getting a thrill from making their lives better. This makes it very hard to fill tech support positions with people who are both competent and happy. (Don't get me wrong. By this definition, I don't like people either. That's why I am a programmer.)
While I am frustrated, I pose these as very serious questions: why don't more users take an interest in educating themselves about something that is going to be more plentiful vs less plentiful in the future? It'd be like being around in 1910 and writing off electricity as "too hard" and thus ignoring the next 20 years of electricity development. I don't get it -- but it is definitely the norm from what I observe.
I'll take you at your word that your questions are serious, and try to give serious answers.
The world is a big place, with lots of valuable things to learn. Time is scarce, intellects are imperfect, and interests vary. It's almost 2010, and all I know about electricity is how to plug stuff in and how to call an electrician. I know very little about accounting, tax law, or financial investment and have no plans to learn even though they would be useful. I expect to see more solar power, but don't plan to learn much about it, even if I buy a house that uses it.
I make my living with computers because of the happy coincidence that I like them and I can get paid for it. The people you are railing against are your customers. Whether directly or indirectly, they are paying you money to know things so that they don't have to. Their time is apparently better spent being dentists or trapeeze artists. Aren't you glad you don't have to learn to do those things? Despite what you say, I think that auto-mechanics are a perfect analogy. Sometimes I ask my mechanic stupid questions, but he smiles and takes my money. We're both largely satisfied with the arrangement.
Maybe I'm just getting old and losing my sense of humor, but it seems like these "ha ha users are dumb" stories get less and less funny. As the audience for personal computing continues to grow, the number of senile, mentally ill or simply ignorant users will also grow. Mocking them leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
The UI in that video certainly looks like a step forward. I look forward to an upgrade at my company.
7.0.3, actually.
I don't know anything about the server end of things--my complaints are strictly as an end user.
...the horrors that must lie waiting within the source code for Lotus Notes.
Schools could use the Notes source to teach the basics of how to build slow, confusing, fragile applications with utterly non-standard user interfaces. Notes is by far the worst piece of software I use regularly. On the other hand, opening its source would let me fix that bug that keeps reminding me I missed the same meeting reminders over and over again.
The basic idea behind Interclue would make for a handy Web utility, but seems too slight to build a business around.
To rephrase: If your product isn't valuable enough for people to spend money on, it will be hard to make money selling it. The rest of the article is a fairly well-written review of an obscure add-on, with very little insight about open vs. proprietary software.
fruey sends in a New Scientist analysis that questions the Long Tail theory. The theory, first described in Wired, describes how retailers with low stocking and distribution costs can profit by selling a large number of unique products to very small niche markets. But the four studies summarized in the article examine different markets and conclude that this business model may be harder to exploit than originally expected. In fact, the importance of blockbuster products which are sold to an enormous number of buyers may be growing rather than shrinking. One possible reason is that recommendation services, like those provided my Amazon and Netflix, may concentrate interest on a few items and take market share away from the niche items.
Effective C++, Scott Meyers -- I own the 2nd Edition, but there may be a newer one. This is the best book I've seen for really making sense out of C++. It is well-organized, covers its chosen topics thoroughly, and is fun to read.
she's dead wrong. this is a fundamental RIGHT, or should be considered as such.
Her words:
Everybody should have the right to it, but it's not something one wants to encourage.
I think you actually agree with each other on the primary point. You haven't made it clear where you stand on her more subtle point: does anonymity, which we all agree is essential, also have unfortunate negative side-effects? I'd say it does. Anonymity removes all incentive not to behave anti-socially. Anti-social behavior isn't always bad, but quite often it degrades the benefits of society.
Do not, under any circumstances, use a solution that involves Lotus Notes.
I'm just curious: what exactly are you automating, and why? Is this just a toy for geek house, or do you see this as something everyone will be doing before long? How much are you developing yourself, and how much are you using commercial components?
Sure there is more gravity on Mars so the amount of force to put you in space will require more fuel.
Gravity on earth: 9.780327 m/s^2
Gravity on mars: 3.69 m/s^2
Or were you trolling?