What language exists that doesn't allow you to write bad code, has no security vulnerabilities, and will still help solve the real world applications that, in this example, PHP is used for? Actually, with PHP being a wrapper for C, which is the cause of most of the issues, please let me know what gives programmers the same power and flexibility, while not allowing bad programming.
With Apple's reputation, Swift might have been a contender, but apparently even Apple doesn't try to wall programmers in so tightly..... possibly because any such language that limits you that much doesn't really see much use, as it's incapable of achieving the same tasks.
Just like chefs need to handle knives and flames (these days, also liquid nitrogen, etc) and can produce inedible meals, an expert chef can produce a tasty meal unharmed with damn near anything edible (yeah, I watch too many cooking shows).
If you didn't allow a chef anything they could screw a meal up with, you'd not be getting much that wasn't screwed up either.
I'm sorry, but web page generation language is "niche"?
I don't necessarily disagree with anything else you said, but I just found that an odd statement considering the ubiquitous of the web in modern times.
Personally, I lost interest when the GP made it clear they consider PHP only good for generating web pages, and that it does nothing to help users write sane readable code (It's so so easy to write sane reliable reusable PHP that the next wet behind the ears college grad can make sense of and build upon, pretty much just don't be lazy, identify the PHP version, and use all the general programming language-agnostic skills like structuring and commenting.... Just because it doesn't force you to do something doesn't mean it doesn't allow it).
While I agree that it can create 'web content' (and due to it's flexibility, excels at it, but also allows lazy programmers too easy access), but thinking that's all it does (and does well) is verging on moronic, even more so than calling the web 'niche'.
But I could summarise 90% of complaints against PHP as "It gives programmers too much freedom" which, to be honest, kind of irritates me, because I'm not a child (||new programmer) who needs their freedom limited.
I don't care how much damage PHP allows lazy programmers to do any more than I care how cars allow lazy drivers to have accidents, or medium XYZ allows artists to make shitty 'art'. I just care about what I can do with it, and how easily, and when it comes down to that, PHP sits near the top of my toolbox.
And as for the flaws it allows, it makes selecting new developers in PHP a breeze, just look at their code, it'll quickly become apparent if they're going to be an asset or a liability.
I love that it exists because it is an easy and accurate resume filter. PHP on it? Delete it!
Time for me to add PHP to my resume so I can avoid job offers from managers who believe that having extra skills makes you worse. I'll never want to work for anyone so close minded.
The fact that there's a lot of bad PHP developers doesn't mean PHP is a bad language, just that it's an easy to use flexible language.
Come to think of it...... There's more people who speak bad english than good english, and english is a pretty flawed language. Perhaps you should also delete any resumes with english words in them?
Yep. I won't touch PHP. Ever. Any time I run across something I want to run and it says "requires PHP", I skip it. Even if there are no alternative programs/applications/projects.
You use this decision making process for everything? i.e. If you don't like something you simply won't use it even if there are no alternatives? Interesting attitude.
OOP isn't what makes a programming language.
PHP initially was completely procedural, and was still able to 'work'.
OOP has it's place, but it's not always the best choice.
I assume you're also one of those people who thinks if a project isn't 'agile' (or 'waterfall', or 'scrum' or 'lean' or whatever...) then it's 'stupid' and a 'brain virus'?
Also, could you please elaborate on how:
PHP literally turns a programmer into an end user.
I've wasted a few minutes trying to figure out the reasoning behind the statement, but I think you left it out...
I have a 4 year old PC that I play borderlands on. Could build a comparative machine as everyone who knows their hardware as noted for sub $400.
I also sit in front of actually a couple of PCs all day for work, so when I get home, I don't want to do the same.
Which is why I forked out a few extra bucks for a wireless keyboard and mouse, and then plugged it into my (yes, expensive) 3D HD wall projector, and with (gasp, a mod) Play it in 3D while sitting on my couch.
Same couch, same screen, same THX surround sound setup is switched for my flatmates to ps3/ps4/xbone/a few other devices.
According to my flat mates (one primarily a console gamer, the other a bit of both) oh, and myself of course, the PC gaming is better visual quality, better framerate, etc - wins across the board.
Oh, I did buy a usb XBOne controller for my PC, it works just fine, but I'm too much of a pc gamer to like controllers. My flatmates prefer the controller though.
tldr: For comfortable living room gaming, friends playing can only tell if it's a console or a PC by the superior quality and experience of the PC, otherwise everything else can run just as a console does, the (not so) big secret being that, well, consoles are just stripped down walled off PCs.
Still reading? I'll keep rambling then:
Buying a console is like buying macbook. Good build quality, reliable experience, works (generally) as advertised, and a simple setup and solid community. If you don't really like tech and just want it to 'play games' and the quality of those games isn't the importance, but the ease of use is, get a console for games or a macbook for work.
If you don't mind upgrading yourself (or having the local computer store do it for you) and want a cost effective gaming experience that focuses on the quality and playability, extensibility, etc, of the games, that can be incrementally upgraded throughout the next 4 generations of consoles to keep ahead of the curve, get a PC.
I'd be interested to find out, when all is done, how many star wars fans end up concentrated in 'Lucasville', and what effect that will have on their behaviour.... Perhaps every new resident gets a free white plastic suit:)
Looking at some random google satellite images, it seems to me like 52 acres of residential area might also include a school, hospital, shopping center, or many other things... there's also the roads to connect them, etc. Each house isn't getting 52/224 acres.
(Also, the infrastructure - plumbing, electricity, roads, etc, don't usually build themselves for free)
I suspect that when you don't require to satisfy stakeholders, or worry about speed of return of investment, don't even need it, that spending 2 or 3 times as much developing this property could easily be due to factors that give a larger return further down the road, or a non-financial reward that means more to Lucas. He seems to be pretty forward-thinking from what I know of him:)
No one stopped to think that perhaps those people who has a medical or mental condition that interferes with their day to day life so much that they have legal access to medical drugs might be operating under those very same additional stressors that are the reason they've got their access, and that those stressors might even make a few percent difference to their performance?
How was it decided to attribute the lower performance to the medicine instead of the underlying condition?
I have taken a wide range of antidepressants, anti-psychotics and anti-anxiety related medication over the years. Their side effects can indeed interfere with my work, but when the underlying condition interferes with my work more, I'll use them, as overall I have an improvement, however I'm still performing under less than ideal conditions.
Should you make antidepressants illegal, because they can/might/correlate to detract from ability to concentrate? (Actually perhaps we should, but the efficacy of mental health drugs is a whole other debate), or should you recognise that those workers taking them are combatting bigger issues than their side effects?
Regardless, sounds to me like a pretty poor study, but yeah, i didn't read the full article, so feel free to slam me if there's something that addresses this.
Just read enough of the article to see that those who were given access to marijuana were a cultural selection, not a medical or random selection, but I could use those same numbers to argue that Dutch, German & Belgians tend to like to smoke more than do school work, or that they have a higher incidence of physical/mental issues that marijuana alleviates, that they generally consider worth the minor side effects, or so on.
TLDR: Bad study is bad.
It gives every narcissistic prick a global megaphone.
Megaphones mean people hear you whether they want to or not (within the vicinity - specified as 'global'). This is more or less exactly 'like' giving him his own global cable channel, amongst who knows how many others? Millions? - no one is forced to watch it. With a megaphone the implication is that you hear it whether you want to or not, and he can't force anyone to watch his streams, so no. not a global megaphone. More of a global telephone number with a party line, except it can only receive calls, not make them...
As soon as the tech for cameras to take 'x-ray' images is available to appear in phones, manufacturers will be scrambling over each other to get it in.
It will be marketed for everything aside for the x-ray imaging, and that ability will not be implemented, so they'll be 'OK'.
Hackers will immediately make the functionality available to the public, the cat will be out of the bag, and it'll just become another fact of the world, that you can't presume to hide your physical form if you go out in public (although a market will open for special material clothing in order to do so if you can afford it - perhaps even become the solution) or perhaps the world will in a generation or two get accustomed to the new norm and stop caring - the 'european' attitude will become the norm.
I hope it happens in my lifetime, will be terribly entertaining to watch it unfold.
Also curious as to that patent and how it bounces around.
The problem is that the spectroscopic techniques capable amenable to implemention on a small device can only give some general information about a material or mixture. This may be enough to select one option from a narrow set of possibilities (eg: is that drain pipe PVC or ABS plastic?).
However, it is not going to identify the presence of a toxin in a bowl of soup or tell you that your gold watch is only gold-plated.
I fully expect one of the first uses would to have a database of common toxins and their signatures, and would indeed be able to detect a sufficient sample, the real question will be sensitivity, which may limit the number that can be usefully detected until the technology is inevitably improved. And once this is in the hands of the public and accessible to develop this is the sort of thing that I expect to make some quick initial advances as others build better databases once there's a need for them, and work out better algorithms of detection and data processing for ever more accurate results...
You would eat a mushroom just because you phone says its safe?
I might take the time to further investigate a mushroom if my phone said it was safe, and to ignore a mushroom if my phone says it is unsafe, all depending on how accurate I found my phone to be. Only a fool would trust a tool further than it's proven reliability.
So the question is, "Will it detect saline or silicone under flesh?"
My guess is it won't be long after this tech is made available to the public that some hackers will write a filter to give us the x-ray goggles I read about it the back of old comic books, for real...
(Note: I mean hackers in the oldschool use of the term)
I'm not a light expert by any stretch, but from what I understand there are wavelengths of light that the human eye cannot see (but potentially these new cameras could; they already see infrared) that can penetrate substances that human-visible light cannot.
This will then bring up a whole new slew of privacy issues.... and clothing marketing opportunities:)
I see what you're trying to say here, but just to point out:
"From 3ft away... perhaps 8k would be better"
If you increase the distance from the display, the resolution requirement lowers, not raises, so if 4k is good on 19" at 2ft, then perhaps roughly 2/3 of that resolution would match the capabilities of the same eyes at 3ft. i.e. less, not more. If the display size increased, however, not the distance, or if the distance shortened, then yes, larger resolution would be required to maintain viewing quality.
PPI is the key relevant term for viewing quality (along with refresh rate, colour depth, contrast ratio, oh, and size, etc). With a PPI value, anyone can figure out if it will benefit them at their viewing distance, and based on that viewing distance, what resolution is their 'sweet spot'. The resolution value without the PPI is meaningless.
Resolution is relevant for application developers and video hardware makers, and PPI far less so to them, and there are a fair few developers on/.
Most of the discussion here seems to be from the consumer position, however, so for that, PPI is key.
Yeah, we rarely say 'phone', we're Aussies, don't use more words (or syllables) than required to be understood (or partly understood, if not talking to another Aussie).
I personally do often call it a 'mobile phone' as a compromise when speaking to my American friends, however.
(I lived a while in the USA, and I think between work and friends, I talk to Americans more than Aussies, most days)
I'd mod you up for interesting, but already posted.
I do think it's still entirely possible for some other factor like this to be relevant, well worth considering, or at least keeping in mind.
I feel like there's truth to both.
Turns out they found that the browser that happened to be used while doing the assessment (might not even have been the applicant's own computer...) actually does have enough value in it to show a 15% variance.
No doubt, if they managed to instead get accurate numbers that removed inaccuracies and noise and narrowed down on a more accurate reading, I expect the variance would be more than that 15%.
Of course, it could also be less, don't know for sure till you figure that superior study out, but for the data at hand, they're able to find some interesting correlation.
I definitely do think there's room for improvement, and, based on this study, reason to be hopeful to find more valuable information in further studies.
Even basic results aren't automatically garbage, however, but it probably takes a scientific mind to see it that way.
For the sake of argument, in Australia we (mostly - in Sydney area) still call them mobile phones. But we have American TV, so we understand 'cell phone' also, and many other americanisms, and stuff from other languages.
On the other hand, I do not see what the intent was pointing out that cell phone is am American term. Either way, it was understood, right? There's lots of words for, say, 'sex' too, that often vary by locale, however most people seem to relish knowing as many alternatives to that term as they can, rather than insisting their local name is the only correct one. (Aussies locally claim 'root' as our slang term, among others)
I guess as an Aussie who has travelled the world a fair amount, and speaks a smattering of other languages (none very well, mind you) I recognise that the 'English' we speak here in Australia has so many words and terms from so many other languages that it's idiotic to argue which word label is best, and to ignore languages idiosyncrasies except when directly discussing language itself.
Sure, if you don't understand the word/term used, ask a question, but if you do understand, what is the gain in patronising the other uselessly, and possibly (depending on perspective) inaccurately?
When I lived in the USA, I occasionally called them 'mobiles' but the consistent blank looks from the Americans I was talking to taught me to call them 'cells' while I was there, even though I had to pause every time I used the word in a sentence, as it was always 'mobile' in my head.
But nice to see a discussion about eye colour turn into a "My english is better than your english" competition:)
This.
Best description I've heard of the industry in a while.
And to the other replier AmiMoJo saying that young children don't know what cost/benefit is.... They might not yet label it as such, but let me assure you, from the day anyone starts making their own decisions on things, which starts very early, you learn from every decision about the reality of cost/benefit, even if not called that, and kids happen to be pretty good learners in general. You can bet they are all about getting the most benefit for their cost, even if they're not the best at evaluating the bigger picture. (Plenty of adults who are bad at cost/benefit also, but everyone is always considering it, even if not labelling it as such.)
I think there's been a lot of saying it has to be 50-50 and not much seems to care about what the kids themselves want, just about showing the numbers.
Also, just cause we now have larger ratio of female gamers doesn't necessarily correlate with female developers. I think (though ignore this if you like, not providing any references) that it's games like "Stardom Hollywood" and "Candy Crush Saga", "Farmville", "Hay Day", etc, that are bringing in a larger 'female gamer' population. The so-called "hardcore gamer" population is still predominantly male, which I mention as it's usually the so-called "hardcores" that tend to step over to the actual development.
I do agree that it should be as simple as "Make programming available to kids that want to study it" and "Ensure they get a good solid introduction to it so they can decide for themselves", but don't force them to continue/discontinue just to make your numbers look good.
Ran out of mod points, but I'd give this an insightful flag, as while the impact might not be measured exactly, I think there's definitely truth in that, and ignoring it would be counterproductive.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a starting point for you:
http://norml.org/library/item/marijuana-and-driving-a-review-of-the-scientific-evidence
What language exists that doesn't allow you to write bad code, has no security vulnerabilities, and will still help solve the real world applications that, in this example, PHP is used for? Actually, with PHP being a wrapper for C, which is the cause of most of the issues, please let me know what gives programmers the same power and flexibility, while not allowing bad programming.
With Apple's reputation, Swift might have been a contender, but apparently even Apple doesn't try to wall programmers in so tightly..... possibly because any such language that limits you that much doesn't really see much use, as it's incapable of achieving the same tasks.
Just like chefs need to handle knives and flames (these days, also liquid nitrogen, etc) and can produce inedible meals, an expert chef can produce a tasty meal unharmed with damn near anything edible (yeah, I watch too many cooking shows).
If you didn't allow a chef anything they could screw a meal up with, you'd not be getting much that wasn't screwed up either.
I'm sorry, but web page generation language is "niche"?
I don't necessarily disagree with anything else you said, but I just found that an odd statement considering the ubiquitous of the web in modern times.
Personally, I lost interest when the GP made it clear they consider PHP only good for generating web pages, and that it does nothing to help users write sane readable code (It's so so easy to write sane reliable reusable PHP that the next wet behind the ears college grad can make sense of and build upon, pretty much just don't be lazy, identify the PHP version, and use all the general programming language-agnostic skills like structuring and commenting.... Just because it doesn't force you to do something doesn't mean it doesn't allow it).
While I agree that it can create 'web content' (and due to it's flexibility, excels at it, but also allows lazy programmers too easy access), but thinking that's all it does (and does well) is verging on moronic, even more so than calling the web 'niche'.
But I could summarise 90% of complaints against PHP as "It gives programmers too much freedom" which, to be honest, kind of irritates me, because I'm not a child (||new programmer) who needs their freedom limited.
I don't care how much damage PHP allows lazy programmers to do any more than I care how cars allow lazy drivers to have accidents, or medium XYZ allows artists to make shitty 'art'. I just care about what I can do with it, and how easily, and when it comes down to that, PHP sits near the top of my toolbox.
And as for the flaws it allows, it makes selecting new developers in PHP a breeze, just look at their code, it'll quickly become apparent if they're going to be an asset or a liability.
I love that it exists because it is an easy and accurate resume filter. PHP on it? Delete it!
Time for me to add PHP to my resume so I can avoid job offers from managers who believe that having extra skills makes you worse. I'll never want to work for anyone so close minded.
The fact that there's a lot of bad PHP developers doesn't mean PHP is a bad language, just that it's an easy to use flexible language.
Come to think of it...... There's more people who speak bad english than good english, and english is a pretty flawed language. Perhaps you should also delete any resumes with english words in them?
Yep. I won't touch PHP. Ever. Any time I run across something I want to run and it says "requires PHP", I skip it. Even if there are no alternative programs/applications/projects.
You use this decision making process for everything? i.e. If you don't like something you simply won't use it even if there are no alternatives? Interesting attitude.
PHP initially was completely procedural, and was still able to 'work'.
OOP has it's place, but it's not always the best choice.
I assume you're also one of those people who thinks if a project isn't 'agile' (or 'waterfall', or 'scrum' or 'lean' or whatever...) then it's 'stupid' and a 'brain virus'?
Also, could you please elaborate on how:
PHP literally turns a programmer into an end user.
I've wasted a few minutes trying to figure out the reasoning behind the statement, but I think you left it out...
I have a 4 year old PC that I play borderlands on. Could build a comparative machine as everyone who knows their hardware as noted for sub $400.
I also sit in front of actually a couple of PCs all day for work, so when I get home, I don't want to do the same.
Which is why I forked out a few extra bucks for a wireless keyboard and mouse, and then plugged it into my (yes, expensive) 3D HD wall projector, and with (gasp, a mod) Play it in 3D while sitting on my couch.
Same couch, same screen, same THX surround sound setup is switched for my flatmates to ps3/ps4/xbone/a few other devices.
According to my flat mates (one primarily a console gamer, the other a bit of both) oh, and myself of course, the PC gaming is better visual quality, better framerate, etc - wins across the board.
Oh, I did buy a usb XBOne controller for my PC, it works just fine, but I'm too much of a pc gamer to like controllers. My flatmates prefer the controller though.
tldr: For comfortable living room gaming, friends playing can only tell if it's a console or a PC by the superior quality and experience of the PC, otherwise everything else can run just as a console does, the (not so) big secret being that, well, consoles are just stripped down walled off PCs.
Still reading? I'll keep rambling then:
Buying a console is like buying macbook. Good build quality, reliable experience, works (generally) as advertised, and a simple setup and solid community. If you don't really like tech and just want it to 'play games' and the quality of those games isn't the importance, but the ease of use is, get a console for games or a macbook for work.
If you don't mind upgrading yourself (or having the local computer store do it for you) and want a cost effective gaming experience that focuses on the quality and playability, extensibility, etc, of the games, that can be incrementally upgraded throughout the next 4 generations of consoles to keep ahead of the curve, get a PC.
I'd be interested to find out, when all is done, how many star wars fans end up concentrated in 'Lucasville', and what effect that will have on their behaviour.... Perhaps every new resident gets a free white plastic suit :)
Looking at some random google satellite images, it seems to me like 52 acres of residential area might also include a school, hospital, shopping center, or many other things... there's also the roads to connect them, etc. Each house isn't getting 52/224 acres.
(Also, the infrastructure - plumbing, electricity, roads, etc, don't usually build themselves for free)
I suspect that when you don't require to satisfy stakeholders, or worry about speed of return of investment, don't even need it, that spending 2 or 3 times as much developing this property could easily be due to factors that give a larger return further down the road, or a non-financial reward that means more to Lucas. He seems to be pretty forward-thinking from what I know of him :)
No one stopped to think that perhaps those people who has a medical or mental condition that interferes with their day to day life so much that they have legal access to medical drugs might be operating under those very same additional stressors that are the reason they've got their access, and that those stressors might even make a few percent difference to their performance?
How was it decided to attribute the lower performance to the medicine instead of the underlying condition?
I have taken a wide range of antidepressants, anti-psychotics and anti-anxiety related medication over the years. Their side effects can indeed interfere with my work, but when the underlying condition interferes with my work more, I'll use them, as overall I have an improvement, however I'm still performing under less than ideal conditions.
Should you make antidepressants illegal, because they can/might/correlate to detract from ability to concentrate? (Actually perhaps we should, but the efficacy of mental health drugs is a whole other debate), or should you recognise that those workers taking them are combatting bigger issues than their side effects?
Regardless, sounds to me like a pretty poor study, but yeah, i didn't read the full article, so feel free to slam me if there's something that addresses this.
Just read enough of the article to see that those who were given access to marijuana were a cultural selection, not a medical or random selection, but I could use those same numbers to argue that Dutch, German & Belgians tend to like to smoke more than do school work, or that they have a higher incidence of physical/mental issues that marijuana alleviates, that they generally consider worth the minor side effects, or so on.
TLDR: Bad study is bad.
It gives every narcissistic prick a global megaphone.
Megaphones mean people hear you whether they want to or not (within the vicinity - specified as 'global'). This is more or less exactly 'like' giving him his own global cable channel, amongst who knows how many others? Millions? - no one is forced to watch it. With a megaphone the implication is that you hear it whether you want to or not, and he can't force anyone to watch his streams, so no. not a global megaphone. More of a global telephone number with a party line, except it can only receive calls, not make them...
As soon as the tech for cameras to take 'x-ray' images is available to appear in phones, manufacturers will be scrambling over each other to get it in.
It will be marketed for everything aside for the x-ray imaging, and that ability will not be implemented, so they'll be 'OK'.
Hackers will immediately make the functionality available to the public, the cat will be out of the bag, and it'll just become another fact of the world, that you can't presume to hide your physical form if you go out in public (although a market will open for special material clothing in order to do so if you can afford it - perhaps even become the solution) or perhaps the world will in a generation or two get accustomed to the new norm and stop caring - the 'european' attitude will become the norm.
I hope it happens in my lifetime, will be terribly entertaining to watch it unfold.
Also curious as to that patent and how it bounces around.
The problem is that the spectroscopic techniques capable amenable to implemention on a small device can only give some general information about a material or mixture. This may be enough to select one option from a narrow set of possibilities (eg: is that drain pipe PVC or ABS plastic?). However, it is not going to identify the presence of a toxin in a bowl of soup or tell you that your gold watch is only gold-plated.
I fully expect one of the first uses would to have a database of common toxins and their signatures, and would indeed be able to detect a sufficient sample, the real question will be sensitivity, which may limit the number that can be usefully detected until the technology is inevitably improved. And once this is in the hands of the public and accessible to develop this is the sort of thing that I expect to make some quick initial advances as others build better databases once there's a need for them, and work out better algorithms of detection and data processing for ever more accurate results...
You would eat a mushroom just because you phone says its safe?
I might take the time to further investigate a mushroom if my phone said it was safe, and to ignore a mushroom if my phone says it is unsafe, all depending on how accurate I found my phone to be. Only a fool would trust a tool further than it's proven reliability.
So the question is, "Will it detect saline or silicone under flesh?"
My guess is it won't be long after this tech is made available to the public that some hackers will write a filter to give us the x-ray goggles I read about it the back of old comic books, for real...
(Note: I mean hackers in the oldschool use of the term)
I'm not a light expert by any stretch, but from what I understand there are wavelengths of light that the human eye cannot see (but potentially these new cameras could; they already see infrared) that can penetrate substances that human-visible light cannot.
This will then bring up a whole new slew of privacy issues.... and clothing marketing opportunities :)
I see what you're trying to say here, but just to point out: ... perhaps 8k would be better"
"From 3ft away
If you increase the distance from the display, the resolution requirement lowers, not raises, so if 4k is good on 19" at 2ft, then perhaps roughly 2/3 of that resolution would match the capabilities of the same eyes at 3ft. i.e. less, not more. If the display size increased, however, not the distance, or if the distance shortened, then yes, larger resolution would be required to maintain viewing quality.
PPI is the key relevant term for viewing quality (along with refresh rate, colour depth, contrast ratio, oh, and size, etc). With a PPI value, anyone can figure out if it will benefit them at their viewing distance, and based on that viewing distance, what resolution is their 'sweet spot'. The resolution value without the PPI is meaningless.
/.
Resolution is relevant for application developers and video hardware makers, and PPI far less so to them, and there are a fair few developers on
Most of the discussion here seems to be from the consumer position, however, so for that, PPI is key.
Yeah, we rarely say 'phone', we're Aussies, don't use more words (or syllables) than required to be understood (or partly understood, if not talking to another Aussie).
I personally do often call it a 'mobile phone' as a compromise when speaking to my American friends, however.
(I lived a while in the USA, and I think between work and friends, I talk to Americans more than Aussies, most days)
I'd mod you up for interesting, but already posted.
I do think it's still entirely possible for some other factor like this to be relevant, well worth considering, or at least keeping in mind.
I feel like there's truth to both.
Turns out they found that the browser that happened to be used while doing the assessment (might not even have been the applicant's own computer...) actually does have enough value in it to show a 15% variance.
No doubt, if they managed to instead get accurate numbers that removed inaccuracies and noise and narrowed down on a more accurate reading, I expect the variance would be more than that 15%.
Of course, it could also be less, don't know for sure till you figure that superior study out, but for the data at hand, they're able to find some interesting correlation.
I definitely do think there's room for improvement, and, based on this study, reason to be hopeful to find more valuable information in further studies.
Even basic results aren't automatically garbage, however, but it probably takes a scientific mind to see it that way.
For the sake of argument, in Australia we (mostly - in Sydney area) still call them mobile phones. But we have American TV, so we understand 'cell phone' also, and many other americanisms, and stuff from other languages.
:)
On the other hand, I do not see what the intent was pointing out that cell phone is am American term. Either way, it was understood, right? There's lots of words for, say, 'sex' too, that often vary by locale, however most people seem to relish knowing as many alternatives to that term as they can, rather than insisting their local name is the only correct one. (Aussies locally claim 'root' as our slang term, among others)
I guess as an Aussie who has travelled the world a fair amount, and speaks a smattering of other languages (none very well, mind you) I recognise that the 'English' we speak here in Australia has so many words and terms from so many other languages that it's idiotic to argue which word label is best, and to ignore languages idiosyncrasies except when directly discussing language itself.
Sure, if you don't understand the word/term used, ask a question, but if you do understand, what is the gain in patronising the other uselessly, and possibly (depending on perspective) inaccurately?
When I lived in the USA, I occasionally called them 'mobiles' but the consistent blank looks from the Americans I was talking to taught me to call them 'cells' while I was there, even though I had to pause every time I used the word in a sentence, as it was always 'mobile' in my head.
But nice to see a discussion about eye colour turn into a "My english is better than your english" competition
This.
Best description I've heard of the industry in a while.
And to the other replier AmiMoJo saying that young children don't know what cost/benefit is.... They might not yet label it as such, but let me assure you, from the day anyone starts making their own decisions on things, which starts very early, you learn from every decision about the reality of cost/benefit, even if not called that, and kids happen to be pretty good learners in general. You can bet they are all about getting the most benefit for their cost, even if they're not the best at evaluating the bigger picture. (Plenty of adults who are bad at cost/benefit also, but everyone is always considering it, even if not labelling it as such.)
I think there's been a lot of saying it has to be 50-50 and not much seems to care about what the kids themselves want, just about showing the numbers.
Also, just cause we now have larger ratio of female gamers doesn't necessarily correlate with female developers.
I think (though ignore this if you like, not providing any references) that it's games like "Stardom Hollywood" and "Candy Crush Saga", "Farmville", "Hay Day", etc, that are bringing in a larger 'female gamer' population. The so-called "hardcore gamer" population is still predominantly male, which I mention as it's usually the so-called "hardcores" that tend to step over to the actual development.
I do agree that it should be as simple as "Make programming available to kids that want to study it" and "Ensure they get a good solid introduction to it so they can decide for themselves", but don't force them to continue/discontinue just to make your numbers look good.
Ran out of mod points, but I'd give this an insightful flag, as while the impact might not be measured exactly, I think there's definitely truth in that, and ignoring it would be counterproductive.