But efficient in man hours? I prefer C++/Qt and without Qt on top I'd probably drop C++ entirely. Even with Qt there are many things I miss or think work illogically that are as they are because C++ was designed in 1979 as an extension to C designed in 1973 and C++0x only adds toppings. The standard library is completely barebones compared to what you'd expect from Java, C# or any other modern language in 2011.
Honestly so many defaults should have been switched for sanity, for example I'd make all numbers default to 0 instead of uninitialized and if that one write kills your performance I'd give you a uninitialized keyword instead. There's plenty such things that yes, it might save you one cycle but it creates more bugs and more hassle than that one cycle is worth.
What desperate companies often fail to realize is that those you're doing business with are doing it because they're equally desperate. It's rare that you get the easy ride on the coattails of a winner. Don't be surprised if Microsoft thought Nokia is huuuge, they'll get our phones in every shop everywhere and get us sales even if WP7 is only okayish. Not that I'm going to be terribly sorry if both Nokia and Microsoft took a beating, if only Nokia could pass on Qt to someone worthy.
As long as there's some sanity in what applies where, disjoint models would be put into one. That's how it works without a theory of everything, we have models for the various forces that in their limited scope seem correct. And there's nothing saying the laws of the universe must be constant either in time or in space, just that there's some form of pattern we can describe. And I would say there's at least a partial pattern or we'd not have all the models we do have. Even probabilities like quantum mechanics and isotope half-lifes can be modeled.
And what pray tell is the "right" math? There's kazillions of mathematical models, but only one that that actually fits reality - though simplifications can cover specific parts like Newtonian physics. You can't know if your model is accurate without testing. In fact, without observation you can't even guess at a model at all. That sometimes we think we know what's out there in the unknown is the rare exception to when we don't. If we're just going to sit around and think about it, we'll get no further than the philosophers do.
Ideally you'd pick the best solution for the problem every time. The problem is then that you end up with very many solutions, and you need ideal people who understand all of them.
Methodology is a way of narrowing down the variables, here we do it this way and that's what you need to learn too. That way developers become more flexible and components more reusable.
Then you go too far and try banging the square peg in the round hole. Obsession is not good. Total lack of methodology is not good. As usual the answer is somewhere in between, that kind of fuzzy answer nobody really likes.
True, but what is wrong with that? That is capitalism, why should I pay more if I can get it for less (or free)?
The point is that the argument is fraudulent - people claim they'll stop pirating if their demands are met, but instead they simply make new ones and continue pirating. And stealing is cheaper that buying, if you don't care about laws and such - is that capitalism too?
What all the media industry want is communism, aka copyright. The only difference is that the entities controlling it are not governments but private entities. But where is the difference if all media would belong to the state or if all media would belong to a few media cooperations?
That it's fascism, right-wing totalitarianism not communism. The media industry want to own ideas, hence IP. Intellectual Property has just as little place in communism as regular property, so you're on the completely wrong side of the axis.
That is what copyright law have now become, that media belongs to a few cooperations that claim to represent all creative work. Furthermore, the few cooperations have such a power of the government that they are creating laws that benefit only them. The Mickey Mouse Law is the prominent example, in with Disney pushed the US government to extent copyright just before Mickey Mouse would go in to public domain.
That Disney is still hoarding 70 years old material doesn't mean that the people that live now and make new stuff now doesn't deserve to get paid.
I don't see any moral obligation to follow the current copyright laws. It is not beneficial to creating more cultural works, and we have now a different technological landscape that we had 200 years ego. I see no moral in paying the overpriced DVDs when the film in the cinemas pays for itself in the millions and the production costs for a DVD are so low. I see no moral in paying for music CDs for the artists gets only a tiny fraction of the price.
Apart from the many niche series and movies that don't make enough to keep going - particularly sci-fi that I love, the logic doesn't add up. No film ever pays for itself, maybe other people paid for it so you could freeload but being a leech on the cinema-goers doesn't sound quite as glorious. And little is generally better than nothing at all, if you hired a plumber but told him that since his company is charging so high and taking so much only giving him minimum wage so you choose not to pay, do you expect him to be grateful? Really?
Secondly: The over-reporters aren't outliers. There is systematic error in asking people to self-report loss due to security breaches. People either fail to respond to polls due to internal security procedures, or they tend towards overestimating their own loss. It's not simply that there's one guy out there saying he lost $5 billion due to hackers; it's that people who respond to the poll tend to overestimate their real losses by some unknown percentage.
Well at least a sexual braggart knows (or should know) how many he's really slept with. How much business would we lose if we lost our customer data? We might get a decent figure of the people who'll instantly halt business with us. It might be one of the reasons people leave us later, but nobody really knows if it was the tipping point. Trying to guess what amount of new business we've lost is hopeless. Likewise if some competitor now is sitting on our data and stealing customers left and right. That is if we can determine exactly what they did and didn't get and exactly what systems were compromised or if we just have to assume worst case about what they could have done. We'd just have to guesstimate, in fact we'd probably have to look at our performance the next few months and then try estimating how much of that was due to the data breach. If all we lost was X hours of work and Y dollars of equipment, that'd be easy to calculate but usually that's the last part of your worries.
That's because the US makes a big effort not to kill civilians, not to plunder and destroy everything but rather protect and rebuild. If they shifted to WWII era conquest and occupation you'd see profits - and roughly as much resentment as against the nazis (hello Godwin). The smart weapons are ridiculously expensive compared to just bombing the fuck out of everything. If they stopped giving a shit about protecting civilians and only protected themselves, answered all attacks with massive force, terrified the civilians into cooperating with them rather than Al-Quaeda you'd see costs plummet and profits soar. So it's not that war can't be profitable, just not the way the US is running them now.
I really wish they would shut down every site out there that illegal links or shares copyrighted material, so that people have no way at all anymore to download movies and music. Then I would see the whole movie and music industry go in to oblivion because nobody will buy there crap anymore.
Yeah, because it was all going to oblivion before the Internet and P2P, right?
As I was 18 I used a lot torrents, and I mean a lot. Like 5 movies and games every week. Now I don't use that anymore, do I buy more movies and more games? No, not at all. Why? Because that crap is just so expensive and I found so many new alternatives for entertainment. Like youtube where I watch news and starcraft 2 movies, and southparkstudios.com, and collegehumour.com. And I read a lot of blogs and news on the internet. For music I have youtube and lastfm and other services.
Good for you. But everyone else, why are they then downloading all the TV series and movies? Oh, because they actually want them not the youtube garbage. This is the old "I don't like them so neither should you".
Every time I go to the shop and see a nice movie, I see the price and I think: do I really want that DVD for that price? And the answer is every time: no, because it's just too expensive for just one movie that I will watch one day and then it will lay around collecting dust. If the DVDs would be like 5Euro each for new movies and under 5Euro for old DVDs I would buy them. But not for that price, no way
Every time they offer something for X$, there's someone who comes along and says "If only it was available for X/2$ I'd buy it. But if you actually lowered it, most of them would now say X/4$. Or X/8$. Reality is that we know the truth, those who really liked it already bought it at the high price and those who don't will find some other excuse not to buy it.
I don't mind copyright as such when I buy say a paperback book. The author wrote it, whatever deals good or bad he did with the publisher is not my problem, and he charges a price per copy. I buy my copy and that copy is mine, end of story. No DRM, no regions, no EULA, no licensed player that won't let me flip several pages at once (no fast forward), no disappearing ink pages that'll be gone if I resell it (one-time codes), I can sell it, burn it, make paper planes of it and it's a straight deal in every way except for the few limited rights actually in copyright law.
The problem is copyright enforcement which has turned into a huge inconvenience for the customers and is also threatening lots of privacy, due process and other laws. I don't want companies sitting on remote disable/delete buttons to everything I own. Of course you might say I should become a cultural hermit and just reject all commercial TV, movies etc. but I'd rather just take it while I wait for them to clue in and provide a service equal to the torrent sites - at any cost. I do buy the best on BluRay/DVD as the DRM is broken, but they go mostly unopened as I've already had my "digital delivery" long ago.
Hopefully you learn some techniques from working with those tools that will carry over to future projects, but as long as you got a functional project out the door and in the hands of the users, what difference does it make whether you get to use the tools again?
Well, some companies actually have projects that like to go beyond 1.0, oh our language and code base is obsolete so enjoy your legacy support and lack of updates while we work on completely rewriting it on a different platform for version 2.0.
As a developer, you might like that your company continues to make money and that your skills remain relevant to them - both for your chances not to be laid off, pay raises and the general work environment.
True, there's always some general skills to be learned but there's always a lot of language-specific syntax, logic and ways of doing things. It's not that fun to have a dead fad on your resume when others have still live and relevant experience for the job you're applying for. Unless you want to jump on the next fad that nobody has experience in...
Obviously there were a lot of critical systems that had to be fixed and a lot of people that worked very, very hard to fix them. That's not what we're talking about. The point is that so was everything else, every insignificant little auxiliary system had been given the full testing and overhaul. The press was running around like crazy on the 1/1/2000 trying to find stuff that didn't work and practically came up empty.
I've seen bog standard OS upgrades go less smooth than y2k, simply because you hadn't done that much dry-run testing on every weird hardware/software/test case combination out there. It's sorta expected you have tested the 99% critical and no-so-critical things and work out the 1% kinks afterwards, but through the whole "the sky is falling" attitude y2k was tested to 99.99999% or there abouts. Great in ensuring it all went silky smooth, but just maybe quite a bit of overkill. Both in that many spent ungodly amounts on excessive and very expensive y2k compliance and consulting services and that many stuffed the great y2k budgets with other things.
If we really went to all out nuclear war, you might be better off just biting the bullet. What would happen afterwards is a massive temperature drop, worse than the last ice age.
A global average surface cooling of -7C to -8C persists for years, and after a decade the cooling is still -4C (Fig. 2). Considering that the global average cooling at the depth of the last ice age 18,000 yr ago was about -5C, this would be a climate change unprecedented in speed and amplitude in the history of the human race. The temperature changes are largest over land... Cooling of more than -20C occurs over large areas of North America and of more than -30C over much of Eurasia, including all agricultural regions.
-20C is enough to turn Florida into Alaska, one thing is that people can live in Alaska temperatures but the world's food supply would utterly collapse. Billions would likely die of starvation or freeze to death, not war.
I guess it turns out for me the answer is "it depends". I've found that there's little fiction that is so good I actually want to read it twice, it's mystery and trying to guess how the plot turns that is interesting. What I like about the paperbacks is that they can be treated roughly - by the time I'm done reading one most are pretty beaten up. Since I have the space they went into a big shelf, but I realized when my parents moved recently that they were exactly the same way. They had tons and tons of books, but all they'd done the last 20-30 years was collect dust - I rarely if ever saw them read any of the classics. They just gave it all away to the local flea market, and honestly that's where I think my collection would end up too some day. Personally I just still prefer the actual paper format by far, as long as the DRM doesn't get in the way of me reading through the book the first time I got what I wanted. There could be some rare exceptions where I'd really like to own it and read it again, but for 95% I don't care.
Had a colleague of mine that slammed his head good, he was on sick leave almost a year before he was back 100%, dizzy spells, light sensitivity and throbbing headaches... so I wouldn't underestimate the boot to the head.
Its iffy honestly. Most places would hire someone with 5 years XP over some college kid with 1 year.
Probably... when you have 10 years XP and the college kid 6 years, that tends to change a bit though, assuming you somehow make it out there. If you're great enough I guess you'll find away around that glass ceiling, but many places you only get so far without a degree. Normally I'd say the education system is a good way to avoid a short recession, but I think now the education system is packed all the way back to the financial crisis in 2008 and the demand still isn't there and pretty soon there'll be a huge oversupply of people who've finished their degree already.
It might be light and comfortable, but it seems everything will be two-handed. The Wii had many Wiimote-only games perfect for snacking and some beers on the side. It also means it doesn't really work well as a sword or a golf club or tennis racket or whatever, I guess that's been done already but personally I hope they'll do new classic Wii-controller games in full HD.
I've heard that many times, but most often because it's easier for corporations to manage central solutions than a huge number of PC and laptops with local software, local configuration, backing up all the distributed data and so on - the more traditional mainframe returns as centralized applications with thin, thick or web clients. I don't recall anyone with reasonable accuracy predicted that bandwidth and wireless would be so pervasive that private consumers would put their data in the "cloud" just not to be bothered hooking up their phone/tablet/laptop/desktop and syncing locally. And while a lot of people talked about digital delivery, there wasn't really many that talked about pure streaming services - why even bother storing it locally? It's not really coming full circle, I feel it's a very different kind of centralization. Or in the words of Mark Twain, "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme."
Linkbait clearly, but where do you think Jobs will take the iPad next? Don't think about it as a Mac, think about it as an iPad with an extensible/detachable keyboard. Suddenly you have something that does all the iPad does do, as well as being decent for typing up all sorts of basic email / im / documents / spreadsheets / presentations. It may not be a full laptop replacement, but it might be a *sufficient* laptop replacement that you keep using it instead of your real laptop. It doesn't have to win the whole market, just carve out a good nice for itself like the iPad did despite all the doom and gloom here.
Well, my 1080p consumer camera saves directly to H.264 - if your ambition is not higher than that, I'd say it's fine. Sure, if you're going to throw in lots of effects and filters and whatnot it's not ideal but two rounds of loss, one in acquisition and one in final print is not that horrible. It's not much point using a worse lossy codec, and if you go lossless those 3TB will be gone rather quickly...
If this happens to you, you're not doing nearly a good enough job of promoting yourself. Unless you're such a tiny shop it all falls to you, let others deal with it from time to time. Let's face it, it's hard to tell from the outside - particularly for a not-so-technical manager - to say how hard the work is. But if every time they hand it to you it's done in a day and correct while every time they hand it to someone else it's done in a week and not really right, even the thickest brain realizes who the go-to guy is and why he's the go-to guy.
And the cynic in me tells me it's not going to be our home broadband plans. There are after all 4 billion IPv4 addresses. Even if we say half of those go to servers and shit, the top 2 billion residential users would have no problem paying their way to an IPv4 address. It's going to be third world countries or countries with massive growth like India or China who'll get stuck on IPv6-only Internet.
Slashdot Mirror
...for one post-hoc team to fix after the rest have gone on a rampage. Still, I suppose it's better than not having such a group.
But efficient in man hours? I prefer C++/Qt and without Qt on top I'd probably drop C++ entirely. Even with Qt there are many things I miss or think work illogically that are as they are because C++ was designed in 1979 as an extension to C designed in 1973 and C++0x only adds toppings. The standard library is completely barebones compared to what you'd expect from Java, C# or any other modern language in 2011.
Honestly so many defaults should have been switched for sanity, for example I'd make all numbers default to 0 instead of uninitialized and if that one write kills your performance I'd give you a uninitialized keyword instead. There's plenty such things that yes, it might save you one cycle but it creates more bugs and more hassle than that one cycle is worth.
What desperate companies often fail to realize is that those you're doing business with are doing it because they're equally desperate. It's rare that you get the easy ride on the coattails of a winner. Don't be surprised if Microsoft thought Nokia is huuuge, they'll get our phones in every shop everywhere and get us sales even if WP7 is only okayish. Not that I'm going to be terribly sorry if both Nokia and Microsoft took a beating, if only Nokia could pass on Qt to someone worthy.
As long as there's some sanity in what applies where, disjoint models would be put into one. That's how it works without a theory of everything, we have models for the various forces that in their limited scope seem correct. And there's nothing saying the laws of the universe must be constant either in time or in space, just that there's some form of pattern we can describe. And I would say there's at least a partial pattern or we'd not have all the models we do have. Even probabilities like quantum mechanics and isotope half-lifes can be modeled.
That's the theory, yes. But when you factor in things like "How much kickback do we get for selling your phones?" that picture changes. A lot.
I hope it requires the arrival of more misspelling grammar Nazis, so they all can get stuck in an infinite recursion.
And what pray tell is the "right" math? There's kazillions of mathematical models, but only one that that actually fits reality - though simplifications can cover specific parts like Newtonian physics. You can't know if your model is accurate without testing. In fact, without observation you can't even guess at a model at all. That sometimes we think we know what's out there in the unknown is the rare exception to when we don't. If we're just going to sit around and think about it, we'll get no further than the philosophers do.
Ideally you'd pick the best solution for the problem every time. The problem is then that you end up with very many solutions, and you need ideal people who understand all of them.
Methodology is a way of narrowing down the variables, here we do it this way and that's what you need to learn too. That way developers become more flexible and components more reusable.
Then you go too far and try banging the square peg in the round hole. Obsession is not good. Total lack of methodology is not good. As usual the answer is somewhere in between, that kind of fuzzy answer nobody really likes.
True, but what is wrong with that? That is capitalism, why should I pay more if I can get it for less (or free)?
The point is that the argument is fraudulent - people claim they'll stop pirating if their demands are met, but instead they simply make new ones and continue pirating. And stealing is cheaper that buying, if you don't care about laws and such - is that capitalism too?
What all the media industry want is communism, aka copyright. The only difference is that the entities controlling it are not governments but private entities. But where is the difference if all media would belong to the state or if all media would belong to a few media cooperations?
That it's fascism, right-wing totalitarianism not communism. The media industry want to own ideas, hence IP. Intellectual Property has just as little place in communism as regular property, so you're on the completely wrong side of the axis.
That is what copyright law have now become, that media belongs to a few cooperations that claim to represent all creative work. Furthermore, the few cooperations have such a power of the government that they are creating laws that benefit only them. The Mickey Mouse Law is the prominent example, in with Disney pushed the US government to extent copyright just before Mickey Mouse would go in to public domain.
That Disney is still hoarding 70 years old material doesn't mean that the people that live now and make new stuff now doesn't deserve to get paid.
I don't see any moral obligation to follow the current copyright laws. It is not beneficial to creating more cultural works, and we have now a different technological landscape that we had 200 years ego. I see no moral in paying the overpriced DVDs when the film in the cinemas pays for itself in the millions and the production costs for a DVD are so low. I see no moral in paying for music CDs for the artists gets only a tiny fraction of the price.
Apart from the many niche series and movies that don't make enough to keep going - particularly sci-fi that I love, the logic doesn't add up. No film ever pays for itself, maybe other people paid for it so you could freeload but being a leech on the cinema-goers doesn't sound quite as glorious. And little is generally better than nothing at all, if you hired a plumber but told him that since his company is charging so high and taking so much only giving him minimum wage so you choose not to pay, do you expect him to be grateful? Really?
Secondly: The over-reporters aren't outliers. There is systematic error in asking people to self-report loss due to security breaches. People either fail to respond to polls due to internal security procedures, or they tend towards overestimating their own loss. It's not simply that there's one guy out there saying he lost $5 billion due to hackers; it's that people who respond to the poll tend to overestimate their real losses by some unknown percentage.
Well at least a sexual braggart knows (or should know) how many he's really slept with. How much business would we lose if we lost our customer data? We might get a decent figure of the people who'll instantly halt business with us. It might be one of the reasons people leave us later, but nobody really knows if it was the tipping point. Trying to guess what amount of new business we've lost is hopeless. Likewise if some competitor now is sitting on our data and stealing customers left and right. That is if we can determine exactly what they did and didn't get and exactly what systems were compromised or if we just have to assume worst case about what they could have done. We'd just have to guesstimate, in fact we'd probably have to look at our performance the next few months and then try estimating how much of that was due to the data breach. If all we lost was X hours of work and Y dollars of equipment, that'd be easy to calculate but usually that's the last part of your worries.
That's because the US makes a big effort not to kill civilians, not to plunder and destroy everything but rather protect and rebuild. If they shifted to WWII era conquest and occupation you'd see profits - and roughly as much resentment as against the nazis (hello Godwin). The smart weapons are ridiculously expensive compared to just bombing the fuck out of everything. If they stopped giving a shit about protecting civilians and only protected themselves, answered all attacks with massive force, terrified the civilians into cooperating with them rather than Al-Quaeda you'd see costs plummet and profits soar. So it's not that war can't be profitable, just not the way the US is running them now.
I really wish they would shut down every site out there that illegal links or shares copyrighted material, so that people have no way at all anymore to download movies and music. Then I would see the whole movie and music industry go in to oblivion because nobody will buy there crap anymore.
Yeah, because it was all going to oblivion before the Internet and P2P, right?
As I was 18 I used a lot torrents, and I mean a lot. Like 5 movies and games every week. Now I don't use that anymore, do I buy more movies and more games? No, not at all. Why? Because that crap is just so expensive and I found so many new alternatives for entertainment. Like youtube where I watch news and starcraft 2 movies, and southparkstudios.com, and collegehumour.com. And I read a lot of blogs and news on the internet. For music I have youtube and lastfm and other services.
Good for you. But everyone else, why are they then downloading all the TV series and movies? Oh, because they actually want them not the youtube garbage. This is the old "I don't like them so neither should you".
Every time I go to the shop and see a nice movie, I see the price and I think: do I really want that DVD for that price? And the answer is every time: no, because it's just too expensive for just one movie that I will watch one day and then it will lay around collecting dust. If the DVDs would be like 5Euro each for new movies and under 5Euro for old DVDs I would buy them. But not for that price, no way
Every time they offer something for X$, there's someone who comes along and says "If only it was available for X/2$ I'd buy it. But if you actually lowered it, most of them would now say X/4$. Or X/8$. Reality is that we know the truth, those who really liked it already bought it at the high price and those who don't will find some other excuse not to buy it.
I don't mind copyright as such when I buy say a paperback book. The author wrote it, whatever deals good or bad he did with the publisher is not my problem, and he charges a price per copy. I buy my copy and that copy is mine, end of story. No DRM, no regions, no EULA, no licensed player that won't let me flip several pages at once (no fast forward), no disappearing ink pages that'll be gone if I resell it (one-time codes), I can sell it, burn it, make paper planes of it and it's a straight deal in every way except for the few limited rights actually in copyright law.
The problem is copyright enforcement which has turned into a huge inconvenience for the customers and is also threatening lots of privacy, due process and other laws. I don't want companies sitting on remote disable/delete buttons to everything I own. Of course you might say I should become a cultural hermit and just reject all commercial TV, movies etc. but I'd rather just take it while I wait for them to clue in and provide a service equal to the torrent sites - at any cost. I do buy the best on BluRay/DVD as the DRM is broken, but they go mostly unopened as I've already had my "digital delivery" long ago.
Hopefully you learn some techniques from working with those tools that will carry over to future projects, but as long as you got a functional project out the door and in the hands of the users, what difference does it make whether you get to use the tools again?
Well, some companies actually have projects that like to go beyond 1.0, oh our language and code base is obsolete so enjoy your legacy support and lack of updates while we work on completely rewriting it on a different platform for version 2.0.
As a developer, you might like that your company continues to make money and that your skills remain relevant to them - both for your chances not to be laid off, pay raises and the general work environment.
True, there's always some general skills to be learned but there's always a lot of language-specific syntax, logic and ways of doing things. It's not that fun to have a dead fad on your resume when others have still live and relevant experience for the job you're applying for. Unless you want to jump on the next fad that nobody has experience in...
Obviously there were a lot of critical systems that had to be fixed and a lot of people that worked very, very hard to fix them. That's not what we're talking about. The point is that so was everything else, every insignificant little auxiliary system had been given the full testing and overhaul. The press was running around like crazy on the 1/1/2000 trying to find stuff that didn't work and practically came up empty.
I've seen bog standard OS upgrades go less smooth than y2k, simply because you hadn't done that much dry-run testing on every weird hardware/software/test case combination out there. It's sorta expected you have tested the 99% critical and no-so-critical things and work out the 1% kinks afterwards, but through the whole "the sky is falling" attitude y2k was tested to 99.99999% or there abouts. Great in ensuring it all went silky smooth, but just maybe quite a bit of overkill. Both in that many spent ungodly amounts on excessive and very expensive y2k compliance and consulting services and that many stuffed the great y2k budgets with other things.
If we really went to all out nuclear war, you might be better off just biting the bullet. What would happen afterwards is a massive temperature drop, worse than the last ice age.
A global average surface cooling of -7C to -8C persists for years, and after a decade the cooling is still -4C (Fig. 2). Considering that the global average cooling at the depth of the last ice age 18,000 yr ago was about -5C, this would be a climate change unprecedented in speed and amplitude in the history of the human race. The temperature changes are largest over land ... Cooling of more than -20C occurs over large areas of North America and of more than -30C over much of Eurasia, including all agricultural regions.
-20C is enough to turn Florida into Alaska, one thing is that people can live in Alaska temperatures but the world's food supply would utterly collapse. Billions would likely die of starvation or freeze to death, not war.
I guess it turns out for me the answer is "it depends". I've found that there's little fiction that is so good I actually want to read it twice, it's mystery and trying to guess how the plot turns that is interesting. What I like about the paperbacks is that they can be treated roughly - by the time I'm done reading one most are pretty beaten up. Since I have the space they went into a big shelf, but I realized when my parents moved recently that they were exactly the same way. They had tons and tons of books, but all they'd done the last 20-30 years was collect dust - I rarely if ever saw them read any of the classics. They just gave it all away to the local flea market, and honestly that's where I think my collection would end up too some day. Personally I just still prefer the actual paper format by far, as long as the DRM doesn't get in the way of me reading through the book the first time I got what I wanted. There could be some rare exceptions where I'd really like to own it and read it again, but for 95% I don't care.
Had a colleague of mine that slammed his head good, he was on sick leave almost a year before he was back 100%, dizzy spells, light sensitivity and throbbing headaches... so I wouldn't underestimate the boot to the head.
Its iffy honestly. Most places would hire someone with 5 years XP over some college kid with 1 year.
Probably... when you have 10 years XP and the college kid 6 years, that tends to change a bit though, assuming you somehow make it out there. If you're great enough I guess you'll find away around that glass ceiling, but many places you only get so far without a degree. Normally I'd say the education system is a good way to avoid a short recession, but I think now the education system is packed all the way back to the financial crisis in 2008 and the demand still isn't there and pretty soon there'll be a huge oversupply of people who've finished their degree already.
It might be light and comfortable, but it seems everything will be two-handed. The Wii had many Wiimote-only games perfect for snacking and some beers on the side. It also means it doesn't really work well as a sword or a golf club or tennis racket or whatever, I guess that's been done already but personally I hope they'll do new classic Wii-controller games in full HD.
I've heard that many times, but most often because it's easier for corporations to manage central solutions than a huge number of PC and laptops with local software, local configuration, backing up all the distributed data and so on - the more traditional mainframe returns as centralized applications with thin, thick or web clients. I don't recall anyone with reasonable accuracy predicted that bandwidth and wireless would be so pervasive that private consumers would put their data in the "cloud" just not to be bothered hooking up their phone/tablet/laptop/desktop and syncing locally. And while a lot of people talked about digital delivery, there wasn't really many that talked about pure streaming services - why even bother storing it locally? It's not really coming full circle, I feel it's a very different kind of centralization. Or in the words of Mark Twain, "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme."
Linkbait clearly, but where do you think Jobs will take the iPad next? Don't think about it as a Mac, think about it as an iPad with an extensible/detachable keyboard. Suddenly you have something that does all the iPad does do, as well as being decent for typing up all sorts of basic email / im / documents / spreadsheets / presentations. It may not be a full laptop replacement, but it might be a *sufficient* laptop replacement that you keep using it instead of your real laptop. It doesn't have to win the whole market, just carve out a good nice for itself like the iPad did despite all the doom and gloom here.
Well, my 1080p consumer camera saves directly to H.264 - if your ambition is not higher than that, I'd say it's fine. Sure, if you're going to throw in lots of effects and filters and whatnot it's not ideal but two rounds of loss, one in acquisition and one in final print is not that horrible. It's not much point using a worse lossy codec, and if you go lossless those 3TB will be gone rather quickly...
If this happens to you, you're not doing nearly a good enough job of promoting yourself. Unless you're such a tiny shop it all falls to you, let others deal with it from time to time. Let's face it, it's hard to tell from the outside - particularly for a not-so-technical manager - to say how hard the work is. But if every time they hand it to you it's done in a day and correct while every time they hand it to someone else it's done in a week and not really right, even the thickest brain realizes who the go-to guy is and why he's the go-to guy.
Why, did Bill Gates win a Nobel prize in economics that I didn't hear about? Zuckerberg would be the same, high on the money low on the science.
And the cynic in me tells me it's not going to be our home broadband plans. There are after all 4 billion IPv4 addresses. Even if we say half of those go to servers and shit, the top 2 billion residential users would have no problem paying their way to an IPv4 address. It's going to be third world countries or countries with massive growth like India or China who'll get stuck on IPv6-only Internet.