Until a voice assistant can operate on machines under my control rather than reporting to and getting help from "the cloud", I have no interest in one.
I was not referring to contract work, this specifically refers to "wrote the code as a "work for hire", either as an employee,"
Yes, I know. But even as a regular employee, there's a contract involved. Unless that contract says otherwise, whatever you do on your own time, using your own resources, belongs to you.
I have seen these clauses, I specifically ask for them to be removed so I know *exactly* what I am signing.
I have as well, and I always have them removed too. But those clauses are exactly what I was referring to when I said "unless the contract says so".
Yeah, this is true. I still wonder why it is that websites have troubles using micropayment services when there are multiple other types of businesses who've figured it out while ago.
Antivirus programs cause all kinds of trouble. I suggest, for people who are able and willing to stay alert and investigate warning signs, not using any antivirus program at all. Use a tripwire system instead.
If, however, you're the sort who ignores warnings and red flags, then use an antivirus program. Should you use a different one over Kaspersky? I don't think it matters that much.
In my experience, contractors don't often get interviewed.
I'm not a "career contractor", but I've taken a half-dozen or so contract jobs to fill time while looking for a great permanent position. I was interviewed for every one of them.
A bad client could rightfully sue your other clients claiming that they own the code you produced because you assigned copyright to them as a work for hire.
I think getting a good understanding of the copyright laws (and any local variations) is required reading for any programmers seeking to have a long term, professional career.
It's not necessary to remove the jack to "expand the marketplace", since both the USB-C and the headphone jack can exist in the same device. If the new tech is actually better, people will use it instead of the jack.
The problem is that the new tech is not yet better. It's still worse.
I certainly wouldn't hire such an applicant (and would tell the applicant why), but whether or not I let the other company know depends on how sensitive the code appears to be. If it's just mundane stuff, I probably wouldn't bother. If it's clearly the sort of code I wouldn't want being shown around if it were mine, I probably would.
If you are a contractor then they don't own your code.
That depends on the contract. Every time I've done contract work, I've signed a "work for hire" agreement, which means the client owns the code I produce. It would be pretty crazy for the client not to require this, in my opinion.
Even as an employee you still own the moral right to your code.
If a job candidate walked in and handed me proprietary backend code from his current employer, you can pretty much be guaranteed that he wouldn't be getting the job.
This.
I've had candidates do that before, but it's rare. (That I could tell -- obviously, it's not always possible to tell). When it's happened, I've asked for the written release from the employer saying that they are allowed to share the code. If they have one, that makes them even more appealing. If they don't, they aren't getting the job.
it's an easy way to add value to their premium-priced phones
It doesn't add value. Removing the headphone jack is a significant reduction in value. Adding the dongle, at best, only reduces the amount of that reduction a bit.
there really isn't much to complain about here.
Aside from the loss in functionality that is important to a lot of people, anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Likewise, it's hard to switch grocery stores because of the hassle of learning a whole new set of products.
What do you mean here? Where I live, every grocery store has pretty much the same product lines.
Your email provider has you locked in because...who wants to transfer all your old emails to a new provider?
Not me. I run my own mailserver. Changing my upstream provider is painless.
Every service you use wants to lock you in.
But that doesn't mean you have to let them.
Until a voice assistant can operate on machines under my control rather than reporting to and getting help from "the cloud", I have no interest in one.
Yet another excellent reason to avoid using then in the first place.
I was not referring to contract work, this specifically refers to "wrote the code as a "work for hire", either as an employee,"
Yes, I know. But even as a regular employee, there's a contract involved. Unless that contract says otherwise, whatever you do on your own time, using your own resources, belongs to you.
I have seen these clauses, I specifically ask for them to be removed so I know *exactly* what I am signing.
I have as well, and I always have them removed too. But those clauses are exactly what I was referring to when I said "unless the contract says so".
Yeah, this is true. I still wonder why it is that websites have troubles using micropayment services when there are multiple other types of businesses who've figured it out while ago.
Antivirus programs cause all kinds of trouble. I suggest, for people who are able and willing to stay alert and investigate warning signs, not using any antivirus program at all. Use a tripwire system instead.
If, however, you're the sort who ignores warnings and red flags, then use an antivirus program. Should you use a different one over Kaspersky? I don't think it matters that much.
In my experience, contractors don't often get interviewed.
I'm not a "career contractor", but I've taken a half-dozen or so contract jobs to fill time while looking for a great permanent position. I was interviewed for every one of them.
In that case, everything you do, even at home, is theirs.
Not unless the contract says so. The contract covers only the contracted work, not everything that you do.
What I was looking for was some argument as to why you have "moral rights" to the code. It's not at all obvious to me.
A bad client could rightfully sue your other clients claiming that they own the code you produced because you assigned copyright to them as a work for hire.
Only if you reused the code.
Because some rights are unassailable.
Well, that clears things up.
I think getting a good understanding of the copyright laws (and any local variations) is required reading for any programmers seeking to have a long term, professional career.
I agree completely on this.
Most pros I know do their coding at work then relax in their time away doing something else most of the time.
We know a different set of pros, then. Most of the ones I know have a hobby programming project going on at home.
I think you missed my point: you develop a hobby project that will show off the skills you want to show off.
Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch.
It's not necessary to remove the jack to "expand the marketplace", since both the USB-C and the headphone jack can exist in the same device. If the new tech is actually better, people will use it instead of the jack.
The problem is that the new tech is not yet better. It's still worse.
I would let management at the other company know.
I certainly wouldn't hire such an applicant (and would tell the applicant why), but whether or not I let the other company know depends on how sensitive the code appears to be. If it's just mundane stuff, I probably wouldn't bother. If it's clearly the sort of code I wouldn't want being shown around if it were mine, I probably would.
Would you fail to turn in a thief because they might get in trouble if you did?
If you are a contractor then they don't own your code.
That depends on the contract. Every time I've done contract work, I've signed a "work for hire" agreement, which means the client owns the code I produce. It would be pretty crazy for the client not to require this, in my opinion.
Even as an employee you still own the moral right to your code.
Say what? How do you figure that?
If a job candidate walked in and handed me proprietary backend code from his current employer, you can pretty much be guaranteed that he wouldn't be getting the job.
This.
I've had candidates do that before, but it's rare. (That I could tell -- obviously, it's not always possible to tell). When it's happened, I've asked for the written release from the employer saying that they are allowed to share the code. If they have one, that makes them even more appealing. If they don't, they aren't getting the job.
Code samples don't have to be from your job. Have a hobby programming project, and use that for your code samples.
Indeed so!
it's an easy way to add value to their premium-priced phones
It doesn't add value. Removing the headphone jack is a significant reduction in value. Adding the dongle, at best, only reduces the amount of that reduction a bit.
there really isn't much to complain about here.
Aside from the loss in functionality that is important to a lot of people, anyway.
BT speakers batteries last for a very, very long time.
BT earbud batteries do not.
They didn't do it to save money. They did it to encourage people to buy Pixel Buds.
tbh, if youâ(TM)re an audiophile you probably wouldnt be using your phone as a source in the first place.
Yes, but you don't have to be an audiophile to be dissatisfied with the quality of Bluetooth audio.