You realize the law has a lot of things in it to make Republicans happy right (such as dropping the government option from the plan)? And Republicans decided they'd rather make Obama look bad than make sure people have health coverage right? It would be like if during the Apollo mission Republicans ran congress and kept trying to sabotage the program to make JFK/LBJ look bad.
The key thing I've found that helps with all of those things (though certainly not completely) is taking the extra time to drive a requirement/design/implementation down to it's essential elements and separating the high level logic from the low level implementation details. Reducing complexity today while still meeting the design goals will pay dividends down the road.
The hardest part is when the person asking you to implement something new doesn't think through the implications of what they're asking for. Sure it looks great on powerpoint for one specific use case, but rarely are all of the relevant factors are taken into account.
Opps. Thanks. I remembered wrong. Probably because back when I took Networking, they emphasized the 7 layers of OSI and the TCP/IP analogues but they weren't actually the same protocol.
With the NSF, it was using Ada and ISO/OSI instead of C or C++ and TCP/IP. We solved that problem with creative prevarication. Since there was no imaginable way that the functionality was even implementable in ISO/OSI, we got away with it.
TCP/IP is part of OSI. And anything you can do in C you can do in Ada. If anything, Ada will produce a more reliable system because it has built in safeguard that C doesn't bother with.
The problem is that they have chosen to monetize the games' production by leveraging artificial scarcity. If instead they monetized the production up front, you know, do work and get paid to do it, then the work belongs to whomever paid for it ( in this case the public at large ), then we would have more games, more content (have to keep working to make more money), and all games would be "free" after they were created.
The reason it's done this way is because it's a lot easier to get a lot of people paying $40 each for a game than one person paying $20 million for a game then letting it be free to everyone else.
However, now that we have financial methods like kickstarter we really could have the best of both worlds. Everyone interested could pay the up front costs and, assuming it gets funded, once production is done, it can be free. Whether or not this will become a popular way to do things is TBD.
But be prepared... learning to code is HARD. Its A LOT of work.
This is a lie. I wrote my first program while I was still in elementary school. It was also fun. Hard work is that activity we avoid by becoming programmers, like roofing in 100+ degree weather or picking crops by hand and getting paid by the bushel.
I'm not sure that's true. If you divide the cost among all the passengers it will probably be less than the cost for each passenger to drive separately. So getting paid more would actually mean less money for you after expenses.
What they are doing is better than nothing. Now it would be great if everyone lived within walking distance to work, but that's just not the environment we live in. It will take a lot to change it. That being said, buses are feasible right now and there's no good reason not to support them.
The buses are better for the environment and road congestion than if each person had to drive individually. And they don't cost taxpayers extra money. This sounds like a win-win to me.
The problem with H1B is they can send you home. What we need is an immigration policy that lets people come and work without sponsorship. The problem now is employers can essentially deport workers (by not sponsoring them) if they don't work long enough hours for little enough pay. Let everyone live and work without crony government interference.
There was a post discussing how limits were important to creativity, then another post agreeing giving the examples of TOS vs Voyager. C'mon man, this is the Internet, you have to keep up. Thread reading is serious business. SERIOUS BUSINESS.
Self cannibalization doesn't help shareholders either. What shareholders (as opposed to traders) want is a company that steadily grows in value forever.
Honestly, you're better off without an online presence. Unless the company is looking to hire a full time blogger, if they do an internet search at all, it will only be to find out if there's any reason why they shouldn't hire you.
If there were a transaction tax on stock market trades, that would eliminate whatever advantage there is. These guys make money on low margin high volume trading. Just about any transaction tax will make those low margins disappear.
The disadvantage is trades might now take minutes instead of seconds due to decreased volume. But maybe that's not a bad thing.
I mostly agree, except for the critical part. Learn on the job. Make something non-critical you think others who work there will find useful. Then respond to their feedback and try to make it better. After a while you can either ask for a huge raise because you've demonstrated skills and created useful tools for your fellow employees, or look for another job and add those skills to your resume.
It depends on your perspective. Almost all innovation builds on what we already know. That doesn't mean it's not innovative. It just that it might take several years to realize there is progress.
Discovery of planets around other starts - Only stupid people think other planets don't exist. Though we can detect them better. I don't know the tech behind that.
The Kepler space telescope could detect light pixels from stars. Over time scientists mapped the intensity of those pixels. If they see a drop in intensity at regular intervals, that indicates a planet passing in front of the star. The Kepler itself is now broken but there is still enough data to sort through for at least 2 years. And there is another telescope planned.
when was the last time you saw something truely original or innovative?
Minecraft Smart Phones Self Driving Cars Private space flight Crowd funding Growing body parts from stem cells Mars exploration Discovery of planets around other stars
I wonder how boring a life would be to not recognize these things as new and wonderful.
We have super detailed design documents and we still get bit by poor planning. For example, we have 2 groups working on 2 separate but highly related changes. It would have been okay if one was before the other, or if one team were doing both changes, but nope, management wants all of it done yesterday by separate groups. Of course there's going to be issues.
Programming is really about quickly understanding a situation and breaking down the problem into simpler steps.
I agree with this, but I view it more as logic (boolean logic, discrete math) than engineering math (calculus, differential equations). Engineering math has far more to do with memorization than analysis. Unfortunately, its the engineering math that is more often required in a degree plan. I'll take the view that "advanced math" is post-graduate level and not really what the OP was referring to.
Slashdot Mirror
You realize the law has a lot of things in it to make Republicans happy right (such as dropping the government option from the plan)? And Republicans decided they'd rather make Obama look bad than make sure people have health coverage right? It would be like if during the Apollo mission Republicans ran congress and kept trying to sabotage the program to make JFK/LBJ look bad.
The key thing I've found that helps with all of those things (though certainly not completely) is taking the extra time to drive a requirement/design/implementation down to it's essential elements and separating the high level logic from the low level implementation details. Reducing complexity today while still meeting the design goals will pay dividends down the road.
The hardest part is when the person asking you to implement something new doesn't think through the implications of what they're asking for. Sure it looks great on powerpoint for one specific use case, but rarely are all of the relevant factors are taken into account.
Opps. Thanks. I remembered wrong. Probably because back when I took Networking, they emphasized the 7 layers of OSI and the TCP/IP analogues but they weren't actually the same protocol.
TCP/IP is part of OSI. And anything you can do in C you can do in Ada. If anything, Ada will produce a more reliable system because it has built in safeguard that C doesn't bother with.
I'm Ruining Science right now! By these Comments on the Web Pages!
The reason it's done this way is because it's a lot easier to get a lot of people paying $40 each for a game than one person paying $20 million for a game then letting it be free to everyone else.
However, now that we have financial methods like kickstarter we really could have the best of both worlds. Everyone interested could pay the up front costs and, assuming it gets funded, once production is done, it can be free. Whether or not this will become a popular way to do things is TBD.
For some reason it makes me think of KitKat, and how much I like them and hey, Halloween is coming up so maybe I should buy some bags.
This is a lie. I wrote my first program while I was still in elementary school. It was also fun. Hard work is that activity we avoid by becoming programmers, like roofing in 100+ degree weather or picking crops by hand and getting paid by the bushel.
I'm not sure that's true. If you divide the cost among all the passengers it will probably be less than the cost for each passenger to drive separately. So getting paid more would actually mean less money for you after expenses.
What they are doing is better than nothing. Now it would be great if everyone lived within walking distance to work, but that's just not the environment we live in. It will take a lot to change it. That being said, buses are feasible right now and there's no good reason not to support them.
The buses are better for the environment and road congestion than if each person had to drive individually. And they don't cost taxpayers extra money. This sounds like a win-win to me.
The problem with H1B is they can send you home. What we need is an immigration policy that lets people come and work without sponsorship. The problem now is employers can essentially deport workers (by not sponsoring them) if they don't work long enough hours for little enough pay. Let everyone live and work without crony government interference.
There was a post discussing how limits were important to creativity, then another post agreeing giving the examples of TOS vs Voyager. C'mon man, this is the Internet, you have to keep up. Thread reading is serious business. SERIOUS BUSINESS.
Self cannibalization doesn't help shareholders either. What shareholders (as opposed to traders) want is a company that steadily grows in value forever.
Honestly, you're better off without an online presence. Unless the company is looking to hire a full time blogger, if they do an internet search at all, it will only be to find out if there's any reason why they shouldn't hire you.
If there were a transaction tax on stock market trades, that would eliminate whatever advantage there is. These guys make money on low margin high volume trading. Just about any transaction tax will make those low margins disappear.
The disadvantage is trades might now take minutes instead of seconds due to decreased volume. But maybe that's not a bad thing.
Maybe. Another possibility is that those features are heavily timing dependent and the OC chips caused more problems than they solved.
An app doesn't have to be "critical" to make a positive difference.
I mostly agree, except for the critical part. Learn on the job. Make something non-critical you think others who work there will find useful. Then respond to their feedback and try to make it better. After a while you can either ask for a huge raise because you've demonstrated skills and created useful tools for your fellow employees, or look for another job and add those skills to your resume.
Thanks. I was wondering myself. For some reason all my brain could come up with was "analog processing unit" but I was pretty sure that wasn't right.
It depends on your perspective. Almost all innovation builds on what we already know. That doesn't mean it's not innovative. It just that it might take several years to realize there is progress.
The Kepler space telescope could detect light pixels from stars. Over time scientists mapped the intensity of those pixels. If they see a drop in intensity at regular intervals, that indicates a planet passing in front of the star. The Kepler itself is now broken but there is still enough data to sort through for at least 2 years. And there is another telescope planned.
Minecraft
Smart Phones
Self Driving Cars
Private space flight
Crowd funding
Growing body parts from stem cells
Mars exploration
Discovery of planets around other stars
I wonder how boring a life would be to not recognize these things as new and wonderful.
We have super detailed design documents and we still get bit by poor planning. For example, we have 2 groups working on 2 separate but highly related changes. It would have been okay if one was before the other, or if one team were doing both changes, but nope, management wants all of it done yesterday by separate groups. Of course there's going to be issues.
I agree with this, but I view it more as logic (boolean logic, discrete math) than engineering math (calculus, differential equations). Engineering math has far more to do with memorization than analysis. Unfortunately, its the engineering math that is more often required in a degree plan. I'll take the view that "advanced math" is post-graduate level and not really what the OP was referring to.