You are a.NET dev in a.NET company with.NET devs. Why on earth would someone there just up and say "Oh hey,.NET isn't as popular as it was before and many new systems at other companies are being developed in other frameworks. Let's just change all our stuff at increidble cost and huge risk with a massive learning curve".
Of course you're not going to hear that and I'm most certainly not going to tell you to drop or weed out.NET for where you are at. But please be aware your personal experience in your own enclosed environment likely does not reflect global trends. Also, do yourself a favour and check out other frameworks and languages - even it you don't feel compelled to switch you may learn some tricks and new ideas you can bring back into your.NET dev.
Uhh....NET usage has been falling for many years now, that's why they made it open source to try and recover from that trend. I'm confused as to why you are asking for citation when the whole discussion is sort of based on this issue. Also note that headhunters looking for.NET devs could be the result of devs *leaving*.NET causing a lack of hands and thusly an increased need.
If you want a more detailed answer:.NET was generally used in these huge systems where end to end would be built with the same framework. The thing is.NET is not always the "right tool for the job" and increasingly it is rarely the framework devs want to work with. Because of this the general trend is to have more modular systems where each component is built separately and just connected with an API or some cross-component communication protocol (EG Rails server app with API and native mobile clients).
Of course there are a variety of mertis and demeris, cost issues, etc. to consider so I'm not going to tell you to get off.NET but it would probably be a good idea to keep an open mind and to at least try out some other frameworks (and languages) in your spare time. That "gradual increase" you are preceiving in.NET could end and it would be good to have a fallback; not to mention you can reverse-import some tricks from other frameworks into.NET once you know them (or bring some tricks from.NET into other langauges or frameworks).
.NET is slowly beeing weeded out of the enterprise though and that's a trend I don't want to see diminished by devs picking up.NET because it's now "open source". It's OK to hate.NET, open source or not.
Even at the time I thought it was on purpose to calculate new charges for volume licensing. If I remember correctly they had different plans like where you would buy lots of say 100 licenses. I think you could also add individual licenses to the pool but I never really investigated it. The thing was this was all on a private intranet so it's not like MS would be notified to send a bill as soon as the licenses went into the negatives.
To be honest I really don't care about how the system works as I'm an all OSS shop now and don't deal with MS past a Windows 8 VM we use for testing cross-compilation.
I'm sure this has been fixed - or I hope it has, but when I was imaging a lab at a university they had a license server. The admin had just been clicking next on all the automated activtions the available license count went into negative numbers without any sort of alert or warning. I guess maybe it's not a bug, but perhaps a way for MS to come in a few months later and charge a bunch of money because the admin forgot to de-activate the licenses before re-imaging.
So these remote starters you had were very analog devices. Today the engine initialization sequence requires a variety of digital magic and proper remote starting requires encrypted signals and identification. NOW your original comment makes perfect sense to me.
Whoa whoa whoa, you forgot the context there! In the 60's absolutely none of what I said was valid or at least I'm sure it wasn't common place. My point was that *today* if you said you wanted a remote starter I'd ask you why and try to recommend a device that solves your specific problem in a secure and efficient manner.
Wait... you had remote starters in the 60's?
As for garage doors, we have a shutter at our office that constantly gets messed up and requires a complex, very analog reset process. On top of that we're right in front of a busy street. It's not uncommon I have to pull into a side street, open up the side door, manually lift the shutter, run back to the car, make three left turns and pull into the garage. So believe me when I tell you that my opinion on garage doors is that they are absolutely wonderful (when they work).
No, but I also don't live in a place that gets extremely cold either. The thing is if you want to heat the engine then you should get a block heater. If you want to heat the cabin there are separate and add-on heater units and modular heaters specifically designed to do this without having to turn on the engine. Of course in general you should probably be winterizing your car so you don't need a block heater; EG: insulated heavy-duty battery and a bottle of fuel line condensation remover at least.
If I'm not mistaken most hybrids actually have an electric pump and heater on the coolant or water line that functions as sort of an active block heater.
Also if you have a manual it's common practice to leave the vehicle in gear, so besides the fact you usually need to de-clutch just to start if you did disable the cutch sensor you'd also have to worry about accidentally leaving the car in gear - and if you aren't leaving the car in gear you have to worry about fogetting the e-brake or an unreliable e-brake on an older vehicle.
So I maintain my position that remote starters are a bad idea.
I'm assuming you mean my idea is stupid; which in all likelyhood it is but I never claimed to be an expert in the field of probes and space exploration. Was there something particularly stupid about my post that actually warranted a response?
Reguardless of how "patentable" things like round buttons and beveled edges should be you obviously don't understand how patents work. If Apple tried to sue the people they derived from for patent infringement they would loose and also run the risk of having their patent nullifed. If the people they copied from wanted to nullify the Apple patent or come to Samsungs aide in the case Apple put against them they could have. None of these things happened.
And while we're on the subject, Samsung has a long history of non-trivial patent infringement. For instantance they blatantly stole Sharp LCD TV technology when it was the hot thing at the time and basically destroyed the market for Sharp after sharp had put immense effort and research into the technology. Even today Sharp has not recovered from this. http://online.wsj.com/articles...
There are many many many other cases too. Samsung is unforgivable. They just copy everything and they think this is a valid business strategy. Seriously, why do more people not boycott them?
Unless you're trying to use some remote starter kit from the caveman era there are plenty of ways to implement a competent remote starter system. If you already have a keyless starter you can actually do it with an ODB-II plug-in - no line splicing and no engine bay work.
Of course I'd really question why people want remote starters in the first place. And while we're on the subject cruse control and throttle control are two things I continue to think are awful ideas.
First off there are aftermarket ECUs but to be perfectly honest all the current and last generation Toyota and Subaru I've dealt with have easily tunable and easy to flash ECUs. You do of course need hardware to do a flash on an original ECU but they aren't limited to dealers.
First off I'm a GT86 [FR-S/BRZ] owner and let me say if you're ready to put down the money it is an absolutely fantastically hackable car. If you're only talking about electronics the entire dash is super easy to take apart and it's super clean and organized in back with very nice access to core system lines and power. There are plenty of aftermarket ECUs and ECU extension units and of course it's a new generation Toyota so if you wanted to you could hook up to one of the data lines and play with all sorts of things. ODB-II in the vehicle also seems to have some extensions and I've seen people getting oil temp/pressure from add-on sensors through it. As for performance the ammout of engine, drivetrain, footwork and body mods available for them is insane. Here in Japan they actually have huge monthly catalogues of new parts just for the 86/BRZ. Of course stock is pretty nice as-is if you have a model with the torsen diff (but if you get an R grade a helical would be a superior addition).
As for the EVO vs WRX I'd argue for the WRX Impreza just from the ammount of fantacism that continues around them continuing to drive aftermarket parts production. Case in point: find a bolt on turbo for an Impreza GC or GD - you can get one brand new / an older EVO? good luck. For a used WRX I'd actually recommend looking for something between a later GC and a GG because they were built in an era when constant adjustments and part swaps for different rally types was the thing and also because a lot of the fantics tend to center on those "glory days" models. Of course owning an 86 it's not like I'm baised toward Subaru or anything *cough* *cough*. I'm super curious about the new WRX STI but I've only seen one once and never handled one.
One addition: the Mazda Roadster [Miata]. It's pretty much the "hackable" car of the century for anyone who cares about road handling over numbers (sorry Civic). They're super easy to mod, there are plenty of parts, and there is enough cross-modle compatibility in parts you can pick up scrap spares fairly easily. Just the fact it's a well built, small sized, convertable FR makes me want one for the weekends. Only demerit is apparently in the US they are considered "hairdresser cars"; but a nice beefy rollbar, a spoiler and some badass footwork should get rid of that image.
Then I realized there are situations where that could be beneficial. Maybe expelling some heat from a lander on Mars could reveal something? Maybe focusing heat output could work as a thermal drill on icy environments?
I'm certainly no pro, but I am of the opinion space exploration is fucking awesome.
Solid plans, reasonable milestones and action items that are recoreded anywhere but in the back of your mind are totally unneccesary. All you need is a flashy kickstarter project and enough internet media dipshits to give you the PR to drive it.
While I somewhat agree with your statement let me just add the fact that "The Enterprise" is a joke. The word "Enterprise" in the software world automatically means "expensive and poorly built, unmaintanable garbage with vendor lockin". Maybe "Java" too but the "enterprise" tag already stinks like shit so adding more shit to it doesn't make it any shittier really.
Intensive agriculture means you can grow more crops with higher yield in a more confined and limited environment. This could be as simple as yield per acre but in this case it's going beyond that and actually giving greater yields with fewer resources.
GMO seeds get weaker by the generation because the produced seeds are produced in very specific controlled conditions wheras wild seeds will get cross contaminated with native crops or will degrade amongst themselves due to relative environmental conditions.
As for the pesticide point I absolutely 100% agree with you and I think GMO is a short term solution to the problem with long lasting negative effects.
Yes, but at least there is movement. I think there is also a huge lack of people and a continued lack of financial support.
Still, broken-ness and all I'm comfortably using it now and quite like it. I do sort of miss the classic layout and all the cool stuff you could do with compiz - but the shell view is so convenient I couldn't imagine going back.
Try it again. Intial Gnome 3 releases weren't that... uh.. stable or feature filled. Since 3.10~ish it's gotten better and 3.12 on is pretty solld. 3.14 we're starting to see some nice polish too. Try it again, use it for a week or so, and check out extensions.gnome.org .
I was going to point this out to the parent poster but you did it much more gracefully than I would have.
I'm also surprised that if Groupon is so into "open source" they wouldn't have noticed this before submitting the trademark application. Oh, that and the fact they don't capitolize GNOME in their blog post. Maybe they should have said "we're vaguely aware open source exists and we kinda open sourced some tools so that gives us street cred right?".
Go fuck yourself. This article honestly pissed me off and it should piss you off too. If scientific/engineering endeavors like this and the enthusiastic philanthropists who support them are ridiculed it casts a negative light on eactly the kinds of things and people we should be encouraging. It's dipshits like the guy who wrote this article who are the cause of NASA being under-funded and new engineering endeavous seeing so much criticism about random unrelated shit they never get the go-sign or end up having huge hurdles imposed by governments and comittees. If some random billionaire just up and wants to fund something which will benefit the future of humanity and you try to make trouble for them because they aren't doing it the way you personally want them to do it there is something seriously wrong with you and any effect you have is going to have a negative effect on all of our futures.
The adoption of Rail travel and Airline travel by the rich is exactly what pushed down the price. The more demand there was the more that was developed for it, and the more that was developed the cheaper it beame to produce and run; and the early "rich" adopters paid the bills.
The situation you're describing is certainly true for a variety of products, but none of them happen to include the transportation industry.
Way to totally fucking miss the point and way to totally fucking mis-interpret Virgins intentions. Seriously, 5 minutes of Google searches could have saved you from looking like such awful fucking idiots.
Also fuck you for basically dis-respecting and dis-reguarding everyone involved in Virgin Galactic. These are people puting a fuck of a lot into making space travel a reality and just because the rich will be the first to enojoy the fruits of that labour doesn't give you the right to bitch. It's exactly the same situation in every industry, including passenger ships, trains, and aircraft. You give Branson shit for this when he's one of the few rich guys out there actually pouring money into this kind of thing. Bill Gates can shove his malaria garbage up his ass for all I care - that's not bringing us into a new era.
Seriously, I hope you fucking die in a fire Adam Rogers. Fuck your "opinion" and fuck you.
Slashdot Mirror
You are a .NET dev in a .NET company with .NET devs. Why on earth would someone there just up and say "Oh hey, .NET isn't as popular as it was before and many new systems at other companies are being developed in other frameworks. Let's just change all our stuff at increidble cost and huge risk with a massive learning curve".
Of course you're not going to hear that and I'm most certainly not going to tell you to drop or weed out .NET for where you are at. But please be aware your personal experience in your own enclosed environment likely does not reflect global trends. Also, do yourself a favour and check out other frameworks and languages - even it you don't feel compelled to switch you may learn some tricks and new ideas you can bring back into your .NET dev.
Uhh... .NET usage has been falling for many years now, that's why they made it open source to try and recover from that trend. I'm confused as to why you are asking for citation when the whole discussion is sort of based on this issue. Also note that headhunters looking for .NET devs could be the result of devs *leaving* .NET causing a lack of hands and thusly an increased need.
If you want a more detailed answer: .NET was generally used in these huge systems where end to end would be built with the same framework. The thing is .NET is not always the "right tool for the job" and increasingly it is rarely the framework devs want to work with. Because of this the general trend is to have more modular systems where each component is built separately and just connected with an API or some cross-component communication protocol (EG Rails server app with API and native mobile clients).
Of course there are a variety of mertis and demeris, cost issues, etc. to consider so I'm not going to tell you to get off .NET but it would probably be a good idea to keep an open mind and to at least try out some other frameworks (and languages) in your spare time. That "gradual increase" you are preceiving in .NET could end and it would be good to have a fallback; not to mention you can reverse-import some tricks from other frameworks into .NET once you know them (or bring some tricks from .NET into other langauges or frameworks).
.NET is slowly beeing weeded out of the enterprise though and that's a trend I don't want to see diminished by devs picking up .NET because it's now "open source". It's OK to hate .NET, open source or not.
Even at the time I thought it was on purpose to calculate new charges for volume licensing. If I remember correctly they had different plans like where you would buy lots of say 100 licenses. I think you could also add individual licenses to the pool but I never really investigated it. The thing was this was all on a private intranet so it's not like MS would be notified to send a bill as soon as the licenses went into the negatives.
To be honest I really don't care about how the system works as I'm an all OSS shop now and don't deal with MS past a Windows 8 VM we use for testing cross-compilation.
I'm sure this has been fixed - or I hope it has, but when I was imaging a lab at a university they had a license server. The admin had just been clicking next on all the automated activtions the available license count went into negative numbers without any sort of alert or warning. I guess maybe it's not a bug, but perhaps a way for MS to come in a few months later and charge a bunch of money because the admin forgot to de-activate the licenses before re-imaging.
Wow, that's pretty amazing!
So these remote starters you had were very analog devices. Today the engine initialization sequence requires a variety of digital magic and proper remote starting requires encrypted signals and identification. NOW your original comment makes perfect sense to me.
Thanks for the interesting sub-thread!
Whoa whoa whoa, you forgot the context there! In the 60's absolutely none of what I said was valid or at least I'm sure it wasn't common place. My point was that *today* if you said you wanted a remote starter I'd ask you why and try to recommend a device that solves your specific problem in a secure and efficient manner.
Wait... you had remote starters in the 60's?
As for garage doors, we have a shutter at our office that constantly gets messed up and requires a complex, very analog reset process. On top of that we're right in front of a busy street. It's not uncommon I have to pull into a side street, open up the side door, manually lift the shutter, run back to the car, make three left turns and pull into the garage. So believe me when I tell you that my opinion on garage doors is that they are absolutely wonderful (when they work).
No, but I also don't live in a place that gets extremely cold either. The thing is if you want to heat the engine then you should get a block heater. If you want to heat the cabin there are separate and add-on heater units and modular heaters specifically designed to do this without having to turn on the engine. Of course in general you should probably be winterizing your car so you don't need a block heater; EG: insulated heavy-duty battery and a bottle of fuel line condensation remover at least.
If I'm not mistaken most hybrids actually have an electric pump and heater on the coolant or water line that functions as sort of an active block heater.
Also if you have a manual it's common practice to leave the vehicle in gear, so besides the fact you usually need to de-clutch just to start if you did disable the cutch sensor you'd also have to worry about accidentally leaving the car in gear - and if you aren't leaving the car in gear you have to worry about fogetting the e-brake or an unreliable e-brake on an older vehicle.
So I maintain my position that remote starters are a bad idea.
I'm assuming you mean my idea is stupid; which in all likelyhood it is but I never claimed to be an expert in the field of probes and space exploration. Was there something particularly stupid about my post that actually warranted a response?
Reguardless of how "patentable" things like round buttons and beveled edges should be you obviously don't understand how patents work. If Apple tried to sue the people they derived from for patent infringement they would loose and also run the risk of having their patent nullifed. If the people they copied from wanted to nullify the Apple patent or come to Samsungs aide in the case Apple put against them they could have. None of these things happened.
And while we're on the subject, Samsung has a long history of non-trivial patent infringement. For instantance they blatantly stole Sharp LCD TV technology when it was the hot thing at the time and basically destroyed the market for Sharp after sharp had put immense effort and research into the technology. Even today Sharp has not recovered from this.
http://online.wsj.com/articles...
There are many many many other cases too. Samsung is unforgivable. They just copy everything and they think this is a valid business strategy. Seriously, why do more people not boycott them?
Total. Fucking. Bullshit.
Unless you're trying to use some remote starter kit from the caveman era there are plenty of ways to implement a competent remote starter system. If you already have a keyless starter you can actually do it with an ODB-II plug-in - no line splicing and no engine bay work.
Of course I'd really question why people want remote starters in the first place. And while we're on the subject cruse control and throttle control are two things I continue to think are awful ideas.
First off there are aftermarket ECUs but to be perfectly honest all the current and last generation Toyota and Subaru I've dealt with have easily tunable and easy to flash ECUs. You do of course need hardware to do a flash on an original ECU but they aren't limited to dealers.
First off I'm a GT86 [FR-S/BRZ] owner and let me say if you're ready to put down the money it is an absolutely fantastically hackable car. If you're only talking about electronics the entire dash is super easy to take apart and it's super clean and organized in back with very nice access to core system lines and power. There are plenty of aftermarket ECUs and ECU extension units and of course it's a new generation Toyota so if you wanted to you could hook up to one of the data lines and play with all sorts of things. ODB-II in the vehicle also seems to have some extensions and I've seen people getting oil temp/pressure from add-on sensors through it. As for performance the ammout of engine, drivetrain, footwork and body mods available for them is insane. Here in Japan they actually have huge monthly catalogues of new parts just for the 86/BRZ. Of course stock is pretty nice as-is if you have a model with the torsen diff (but if you get an R grade a helical would be a superior addition).
As for the EVO vs WRX I'd argue for the WRX Impreza just from the ammount of fantacism that continues around them continuing to drive aftermarket parts production. Case in point: find a bolt on turbo for an Impreza GC or GD - you can get one brand new / an older EVO? good luck. For a used WRX I'd actually recommend looking for something between a later GC and a GG because they were built in an era when constant adjustments and part swaps for different rally types was the thing and also because a lot of the fantics tend to center on those "glory days" models. Of course owning an 86 it's not like I'm baised toward Subaru or anything *cough* *cough*. I'm super curious about the new WRX STI but I've only seen one once and never handled one.
One addition: the Mazda Roadster [Miata]. It's pretty much the "hackable" car of the century for anyone who cares about road handling over numbers (sorry Civic). They're super easy to mod, there are plenty of parts, and there is enough cross-modle compatibility in parts you can pick up scrap spares fairly easily. Just the fact it's a well built, small sized, convertable FR makes me want one for the weekends. Only demerit is apparently in the US they are considered "hairdresser cars"; but a nice beefy rollbar, a spoiler and some badass footwork should get rid of that image.
This is exactly what I thought.
Then I realized there are situations where that could be beneficial. Maybe expelling some heat from a lander on Mars could reveal something? Maybe focusing heat output could work as a thermal drill on icy environments?
I'm certainly no pro, but I am of the opinion space exploration is fucking awesome.
*Tinfoil Hat: ON
Astronauts are as bad as catholic preists - there's just a huge media coverup so the public won't know about it.
Solid plans, reasonable milestones and action items that are recoreded anywhere but in the back of your mind are totally unneccesary. All you need is a flashy kickstarter project and enough internet media dipshits to give you the PR to drive it.
^ Who voted this down? This AC is dead right.
While I somewhat agree with your statement let me just add the fact that "The Enterprise" is a joke. The word "Enterprise" in the software world automatically means "expensive and poorly built, unmaintanable garbage with vendor lockin". Maybe "Java" too but the "enterprise" tag already stinks like shit so adding more shit to it doesn't make it any shittier really.
I think you mis-read that.
Intensive agriculture means you can grow more crops with higher yield in a more confined and limited environment. This could be as simple as yield per acre but in this case it's going beyond that and actually giving greater yields with fewer resources.
GMO seeds get weaker by the generation because the produced seeds are produced in very specific controlled conditions wheras wild seeds will get cross contaminated with native crops or will degrade amongst themselves due to relative environmental conditions.
As for the pesticide point I absolutely 100% agree with you and I think GMO is a short term solution to the problem with long lasting negative effects.
Yes, but at least there is movement. I think there is also a huge lack of people and a continued lack of financial support.
Still, broken-ness and all I'm comfortably using it now and quite like it. I do sort of miss the classic layout and all the cool stuff you could do with compiz - but the shell view is so convenient I couldn't imagine going back.
Try it again. Intial Gnome 3 releases weren't that... uh.. stable or feature filled. Since 3.10~ish it's gotten better and 3.12 on is pretty solld. 3.14 we're starting to see some nice polish too. Try it again, use it for a week or so, and check out extensions.gnome.org .
I was going to point this out to the parent poster but you did it much more gracefully than I would have.
I'm also surprised that if Groupon is so into "open source" they wouldn't have noticed this before submitting the trademark application. Oh, that and the fact they don't capitolize GNOME in their blog post. Maybe they should have said "we're vaguely aware open source exists and we kinda open sourced some tools so that gives us street cred right?".
Go fuck yourself. This article honestly pissed me off and it should piss you off too. If scientific/engineering endeavors like this and the enthusiastic philanthropists who support them are ridiculed it casts a negative light on eactly the kinds of things and people we should be encouraging. It's dipshits like the guy who wrote this article who are the cause of NASA being under-funded and new engineering endeavous seeing so much criticism about random unrelated shit they never get the go-sign or end up having huge hurdles imposed by governments and comittees. If some random billionaire just up and wants to fund something which will benefit the future of humanity and you try to make trouble for them because they aren't doing it the way you personally want them to do it there is something seriously wrong with you and any effect you have is going to have a negative effect on all of our futures.
The adoption of Rail travel and Airline travel by the rich is exactly what pushed down the price. The more demand there was the more that was developed for it, and the more that was developed the cheaper it beame to produce and run; and the early "rich" adopters paid the bills.
The situation you're describing is certainly true for a variety of products, but none of them happen to include the transportation industry.
Way to totally fucking miss the point and way to totally fucking mis-interpret Virgins intentions. Seriously, 5 minutes of Google searches could have saved you from looking like such awful fucking idiots.
Also fuck you for basically dis-respecting and dis-reguarding everyone involved in Virgin Galactic. These are people puting a fuck of a lot into making space travel a reality and just because the rich will be the first to enojoy the fruits of that labour doesn't give you the right to bitch. It's exactly the same situation in every industry, including passenger ships, trains, and aircraft. You give Branson shit for this when he's one of the few rich guys out there actually pouring money into this kind of thing. Bill Gates can shove his malaria garbage up his ass for all I care - that's not bringing us into a new era.
Seriously, I hope you fucking die in a fire Adam Rogers. Fuck your "opinion" and fuck you.