When I wrote my book on the X Windows Server (sadly, out of print now), it was typical for technical authors to get somewhere between 12% and 18% of the net proceeds to the publisher.
Notice the term net proceeds. That means the amount that the publisher actually received for the book, not the price that someone pays at the bookstore.
What the publisher recieves will vary depending on who's buying and how much they order. (You bet your bippy that Borders gets a better price than Ed's Technical Emporium.). A reasonable estimate is that the publisher will receive about 70% of the cover price, usually, and rarely less than 50% of the cover price.
So, take the cover price of the book, multiply that by say 0.70 then multiply that result by your percentage, say, 0.15 for 15%. That's the amount you'd roughly clear on the sale of a single copy.
It goes without saying that YMMV.
Much more important than all of that, however, is the promotional power of the publishing house you contract with. This cannot be overstated: Number of copies sold is much more important than the royalty amount per copy!
Don't fall for a publisher who promises you 20% without asking "20% of what?"
A 10% royalty on 10,000 copies is better than a 20% royalty on 3,000 copies.
Most publishers won't even want to sign with you unless they think you've got a book in you that's worth at least 5,000 copies. Ask them how they intend to sell it, how they'll promote it, how many other books they have that are like it, and how well they sold those books.
Get numbers.
The name of the game is number of copies sold.
Remember, there's no such thing as The New York Times Best Royalty list
The section making it illegal to obsure the source address of the email is a huge problem.
Not only is it unenforceable in the case of spammers ("Hey, look a bogus FROM line. We'll have to prosecute these guys. If only we knew who they were!"), but it makes it illegal for individuals to use software like Freedom 2.0 from Zero Knowledge Systems to protect their identity or send protected email.
Please remember that who you communicate with is just as much a privacy issue as what you say to them. Give up on the first part, and you may as well give up the whole game.
Gee, let's give the government a tool to force open all of our private communications. What a great idea!
These politicians are NOT doing us any favors. They push these bills for their own reasons and then try to rationalize it by painting a veneer of public service over them.
For those who may not be old enough to have heard the stories of science fiction conventions gone by (let alone witnessed them firsthand), Harlan Ellison, doubtless one of the most talent writers of the 20th Century, is well known for getting, well, worked up about things.
That he has a right to be paid for his unique genius goes without saying. Just try to read the Dark Visions anthology and you will never be the same.
However, I'm not sure that authors should get that worked up about having their works put on the web. I'm not saying it isn't copyright infringement if it's done without the author's permission. But, really, when was the last time you curled up with a laptop?
Gotta have the dead tree edition; otherwise it's not a book. Put it online if you want to. If I read bits of it and I like it or think I can use it, I'll buy the book.
High-end DBMS products provide lots of features that can make coding your web site a bit more cumbersome, but maintaining it much easier.
In particular, built-in enforcement of data constraints, triggers on data modification, and stored procedures are HUGE wins for many web sites. Using these correctly can move tremendous amounts of complication out of your PHP or ASP code and into the database where they can be more easily tracked and managed.
The lack of transactions in MySQL is often commented upon, and its very important. A complex set of related changes can fail in the middle for many reasons, leaving your data in an unknown or even a completely corrupted state.
Is it worth all of that to pay Oracle's fees? For a commercial web site, where dollars are at stake for every bit of downtime or lost data, then the answer is absolutely yes.
If, on the other hand, you're working on something that uses the database as structured storage rather than a full-fledged DBMS, and especially if you don't mind babysitting it from time to time, the cheap or free options are probably OK.
2) Netscape had grand visions of a browser-centric model of computing.
3) Microsoft gives away IE. This is a money-losing proposition. It doesn't make sense if you're playing "fair" - not trying to manipulate the market
No, it goes more like this:
1) Netscape realizes that browser features are going to be key to all operating systems going forward, decides to be "the" operating system of the future, but conveniently forgets that there's a great deal of software in between them and the hardware.
They then start giving away copies of their browser on the theory that if they give away enough of them, then folks will want to buy some copies, too. (???)
2) Microsoft also realizes that browsers are important (belatedly) and starts making one of their own. Realizing that Netscape is probably right about it being a key OS feature, they start incorporating it into their OS shipments for free, because they know that OS shipments are already a money-losing proposition where the only point is to get first chance to sell the user APPLICATIONS.
Meanwhile, as the MS browser slowly catches up with and then beats Netscape's browser in features and performance, the Netscape browser becomes an unstable, pork-filled mess. Whereas Netscape started the browser wars effectively driving the HTML standards process, in the end they found they could barely keep up with the latest standards. Microsoft's standards compliance is, err, creative as well but they manage to stay ahead of the curve more of the time than not.
3) Netscape finds out the hard way that there's no money in OS software, either new or old, and slowly spins out of control. All the while, they invent new "business models" of the week, each smaller in scope until finally they claim to be just a portal and are bought and stripped down for parts.
Microsoft is hardly angelic in this story, but if making fewer mistakes than your challengers is a crime, then I fear we'll have no businesses left.
If you're going to be in the Boston area this weekend, you can see Philip Zimmerman at the Massachusetts Libertarian Convention, on the Saturday the 24th.
Is the message a fake? Is it real?
What does this all mean for the future of privacy on the Internet?
Sorry, my mistake, I was talking about all the other countries in the world (I don't live in the US). In Aus, and a few other places, it is a primary defined task of the government.
Well, I made an assumption too, for which I apologize. I thought you were a US citizen. US citizens should certainly have no excuse for not reading their own Constitution once in a while.
As I understood the way this happened, they used the raw census forms (which are destroyed in most countries after entry) not the summary data. The legality of this and the risks is open to debate, but the point of the original article was that you could identify individuals from the summary data, and that's what I was explaining, and my comment related to the "legal" information.
The way it was related to me, it had nothing to do with the raw forms. As I understood it, supposedly "agregate" data was used to locate Asian-american neighborhoods, which were then swept for Japanese names.
As for all the "I don't fill in the forms" people, a census is one of the primary defined tasks of governments, and not just counting the people. How is a government supposed to plan what facilities are required at what places if they don't know what type of people live where ? Plotting population trends across the years is how you figure out where to build schools, roads, retirement homes, etc.
Because that's not the purpose of the census, that's the function of the legislature.
Read the Constitution. It clearly says that the purpose of the census is for the allocation of representatives only.
There are much better ways to identify individuals than using Census data...
Really? Tell that to the Department of Defense. Back in WWII (when they were still called the Department of War), it was census data they used to locate and round up Asian-Americans and put them into concentration camps.
So much for agregation of the data, huh?
Privacy is important. Come see Philip Zimmerman talk about Privacy in the Internet Era.
The important thing to remember is that while there are many fine amps out there, different manufacturers like to tweak their circuitry to achieve slightly different performance characteristics.
Very few of these tweaks are "right" or "wrong", except that some of them may sound better or worse to your ears or in your listening environment.
The best idea is to check out a few similarly-appointed models, while mimicing as closely as possible the target listening environment. Think about what you have now and what you like or don't like about how it performs. Then you'll be able to make a choice that works for you. (And audiophile religious cults be damned.)
That said, I think that Yamaha makes some RIGHTEOUS equipment and you should probably take a look at it. I have the 995 and it totally rocks. Got it for less than $1K as well.
Some of us/. readers are environmentally conscious, we don't want our forests and lakes and rivers distroyed by the government or businesses.
Then that's even more reason NOT to vote for Nader.
Nader and the Green Party's program of government intervention will cause MORE pollution, not less.
Because the problem with pollution in America isn't that no one cares, it's that we're using the wrong part of government to work on the problem.
The legislative and executive branches are fundamentally incapable of handling the problem because they are the problem. And Nader just wants to expands their ranks, not address how they deal with anything.
It's those same bureaucrats who can't be bothered to go after real polluters because they work for big government or big corporations. And somehow Nader thinks that if we make new laws and hire new bureaucrats that all of a sudden this problem will go away?
Don't believe me? Then check out who the number 1 polluter is in the US: THE US GOVERNMENT
If you want to reduce pollution, we have to stop using the legislative branch to handle the problem, and start using the courts.
The Libertarian solution is to haul polluters into court and make them pay damages.
It worked against WR Grace, it worked for Erin Brockovich (the real life person), and it will work much better than hiring more armies of bureaucrats and writing new arcane and silly laws.
I'm honestly boggled. How can any reader of/. vote for that anti-tech green-shirt Nader?
The man reportedly refuses to become computer literate.
Is this the guy who you think can be a leader in the 21st century?
Plus, he and his party want to tax you back in the stone age, all while claiming to be attacking "the rich" and "the big corporations". Want a clue? When he says "the rich" HE MEANS YOU
If you really want to rein in corporations, then rein in the government power they use to boss us around.
The City of Cambridge, Massachusetts has Instant Runoff Voting, and it's still the most entrenched, bureaucratic, cliquish, little socialistic haven you never wanted to see.
Instant Runoff Voting simply isn't the answer.
Besides, there are already nearly 300 Libertarians serving in office, including more than 20 right here in Massachusetts.
Now, the Greens, Reform, and Natural Law, can't say that. Nor can any of the other "wet dog" parties around the nation.
Actually, my favorite thing about DARE is when the cops paint confiscated cars with the DARE logos and such. I saw a 'vette painted that way once, and I had to laugh when I imagined the following exchange:
"Peterson, get in here!"
"Yes, Chief?"
"Peterson, your new cruiser is in. The good news, is it's a Corvette."
"Thank you, sir, what's the bad news?"
"The bad news is, we had it painted with that candy-ass DARE shit, so you better watch yourself in the squad room."
I think he (and a lot of people, both here and elsewhere) need to be educated and made to realize (or at least confront and argue against) the notion that a government mandated and enforced monopoly isn't necessary for IP creators to be fairly compensated and, furthermore, has a stifling impact on the field of endeavor so affected, not to mention the society, culture, and the economy as a whole.
Please note that the original author didn't say that the current method of rewarding people for their IP is necessarily the best one, only that they felt that honest work deserves to be rewarded.
Virtually all Libertarians (and hopefully, people in general) would agree with that statement, though Libertarians would also be quick to point out that what an artist thinks is just compensation and what the market thinks may be and often are two different things.
I personally feel that the anti-Napster musicians are being woefully short-sighted about the new technologies. Probably it will just take a few more examples of artists making it big without punishing the fans before the idea will really catch on.
Nader will replace the drug war with a new War On Income
Absolutely true. And there's no room for privacy under a policy of 100% Income Taxes for folks who make more than the Green's rather arbitrary idea of a decent income.
If you want to end the War on Drugs, and you want the government to keep its hands off the economy, there's only one vote: Harry Browne, Libertarian for President
Let's not forget the demand side of this equation. Truth is, we have so much need for IT professionals and the demand so far outstrips the supply that we're being forced to take on virtually any warm body who can claim a passing familiarity with computers.
Those of us who are a little older will probably remember when the newest programmers weren't given anything much bigger than a few functions to write and maintain. No so anymore, when the need for programming talent has driven prices up so far that all some organizations can afford are those same "new" programmers.
When I started writing code, the algorithms that were especially clever, useful, or elegant used to get collected by engineers and bound into books. You're a crusty old one these days if you have an old, xerographed copy of "The Hackmem" or even know what it is. Doubly so for old copies of "Collected Algorithms of the ACM" which used to be distributed on microfiche!
Instead, these days you get a chorus of untrained "experts" in "visual programming" who loudly proclaim that algorithms are unnecessary to programming!
Don't believe me? Last year, Visual Basic Programmer's Journal had the temerity to publish an article showing some very basic algorithms and how they could be applicable in VB programming. The response from readers was stunning. One said: "I have worked in VB for 10 years and NEVER used an algorithm."
As a manager of software developers, and one who came up through the ranks as quite a good software engineer, I have been used to using a light touch when trying to get developers to improve their practices, because most had pretty good practices and had an extraordinary pride in them.
These days, I'm finding that I often need to switch completely to playing the role of the drill sergeant, because so many engineers lack even the most basic skills for developing clean, reliable, understandable code.
The good news is, you've probably already been in management and didn't know it. Now you're just getting the chance to work without the net.
My definition of management (and I've been doing it for over a decade now) is taking personal responsibility for the overall success of the project, rather than just for your own contribution to it.
There are many books that can help, and many, many more that do little except enrich their publishing companies. (See anything by Ken Blanchard, especially things on Situational Leadership.)
Remember these rules for starters and you'll be OK:
Money may bring people into the office each morning, but it can't make them do their best work. For that, they need to feel like they're on a mission, and that you have given them the tools and the autonomy to succeed.
Different people will need different amounts of help. Even the same person may need different kinds of help for different jobs. Adjust your strategies to each person, not each person to your strategies.
When someone tells you they want to leave, let them go. There are enough jobs in the world that no one has to be working on something they don't like.
When hiring, place more emphasis on finding people who share your corporate and personal values than on those who have the perfect technical skills. Technical skills are much easier to teach than values.
Be strictly fair with people. Never allow race, religion, politics, sexual preference, or anything else that isn't directly related to the job to come into your hiring and firing decisions.
There are basically two kinds of job skills: technical and emotional. Gaps in technical skills are addressed by training, gaps in emotional skills are addressed by coaching. People with no gaps are rare and precious; treat them well and delegate to them freely.
Create a good relationship with your team members, but don't try to be their friend. If they think of you as a friend, they'll take advantage of that friendship to avoid being challenged.
Your primary responsibility hasn't changed: job #1 is still to make the boss look good.
Fight for your team. Make sure they have the tools and the time to do their best work.
Challenge your team. Make them improve their work by sharing it with each other and learning from one another's mistakes.
Don't walk around looking for things to punish. Instead, search for things to praise. What you praise you'll get more of. What you punish simply goes underground.
Give them structure: teach them how to make changes safely, and when no changes are safe.
Realize that software is never done, but sometimes it's shippable. Work to keep the code in shippable condition as often as possible.
Create a culture of early bug detection. Find problems before QA does. Fix them before anyone notices them. Document them so that you don't do them again. Create tests for them to make sure.
Some days, you'll beg to be just a "regular" engineer again. All managers do.
But remember that when everything works out, it can be one of the most rewarding jobs out there. In management, you can make more good software happen than you can alone. And all of the sacrifices will make software releases that much more fulfilling.
Slashdot Mirror
When I wrote my book on the X Windows Server (sadly, out of print now), it was typical for technical authors to get somewhere between 12% and 18% of the net proceeds to the publisher.
Notice the term net proceeds. That means the amount that the publisher actually received for the book, not the price that someone pays at the bookstore.
What the publisher recieves will vary depending on who's buying and how much they order. (You bet your bippy that Borders gets a better price than Ed's Technical Emporium.). A reasonable estimate is that the publisher will receive about 70% of the cover price, usually, and rarely less than 50% of the cover price.
So, take the cover price of the book, multiply that by say 0.70 then multiply that result by your percentage, say, 0.15 for 15%. That's the amount you'd roughly clear on the sale of a single copy.
It goes without saying that YMMV.
Much more important than all of that, however, is the promotional power of the publishing house you contract with. This cannot be overstated: Number of copies sold is much more important than the royalty amount per copy!
Don't fall for a publisher who promises you 20% without asking "20% of what?"
A 10% royalty on 10,000 copies is better than a 20% royalty on 3,000 copies.
Most publishers won't even want to sign with you unless they think you've got a book in you that's worth at least 5,000 copies. Ask them how they intend to sell it, how they'll promote it, how many other books they have that are like it, and how well they sold those books.
Get numbers.
The name of the game is number of copies sold.
Remember, there's no such thing as The New York Times Best Royalty list
How often do you conceal your identity in sending bulk email to people with whom you've had no prior relationship whatsoever?
Um, gee. When would a person want to do that?
How about when acting as a whistle-blower and alerting the media to government or corporate malfeasance?
I'm pretty sure that most folks don't have a personal relationship with a bunch of news anchors or their producers.
Making any kind of speech illegal is tremendously dangerous and must be done with tremendous caution.
Not only is it unenforceable in the case of spammers ("Hey, look a bogus FROM line. We'll have to prosecute these guys. If only we knew who they were!"), but it makes it illegal for individuals to use software like Freedom 2.0 from Zero Knowledge Systems to protect their identity or send protected email.
Please remember that who you communicate with is just as much a privacy issue as what you say to them. Give up on the first part, and you may as well give up the whole game.
Gee, let's give the government a tool to force open all of our private communications. What a great idea!
These politicians are NOT doing us any favors. They push these bills for their own reasons and then try to rationalize it by painting a veneer of public service over them.
It's a lie and a trap; don't trust them.
the ASPCA will be protesting this game, mark my words
Do you mean the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animations?
The solution is simple, and doesn't require any constitutional wrangling: END THE SALES TAX!!
Rather.
That's what I get for posting when tired. Thanks for the correction.
For those who may not be old enough to have heard the stories of science fiction conventions gone by (let alone witnessed them firsthand), Harlan Ellison, doubtless one of the most talent writers of the 20th Century, is well known for getting, well, worked up about things.
That he has a right to be paid for his unique genius goes without saying. Just try to read the Dark Visions anthology and you will never be the same.
However, I'm not sure that authors should get that worked up about having their works put on the web. I'm not saying it isn't copyright infringement if it's done without the author's permission. But, really, when was the last time you curled up with a laptop?
Gotta have the dead tree edition; otherwise it's not a book. Put it online if you want to. If I read bits of it and I like it or think I can use it, I'll buy the book.
However, it still lacks:
Don't get me wrong. I like MySQL and I use it all the time. But if you're building a commercial site, you need commercial-grade tools.
In particular, built-in enforcement of data constraints, triggers on data modification, and stored procedures are HUGE wins for many web sites. Using these correctly can move tremendous amounts of complication out of your PHP or ASP code and into the database where they can be more easily tracked and managed.
The lack of transactions in MySQL is often commented upon, and its very important. A complex set of related changes can fail in the middle for many reasons, leaving your data in an unknown or even a completely corrupted state.
Is it worth all of that to pay Oracle's fees? For a commercial web site, where dollars are at stake for every bit of downtime or lost data, then the answer is absolutely yes.
If, on the other hand, you're working on something that uses the database as structured storage rather than a full-fledged DBMS, and especially if you don't mind babysitting it from time to time, the cheap or free options are probably OK.
1) Microsoft makes money charging for software.
2) Netscape had grand visions of a browser-centric model of computing.
3) Microsoft gives away IE. This is a money-losing proposition. It doesn't make sense if you're playing "fair" - not trying to manipulate the market
No, it goes more like this:
1) Netscape realizes that browser features are going to be key to all operating systems going forward, decides to be "the" operating system of the future, but conveniently forgets that there's a great deal of software in between them and the hardware.
They then start giving away copies of their browser on the theory that if they give away enough of them, then folks will want to buy some copies, too. (???)
2) Microsoft also realizes that browsers are important (belatedly) and starts making one of their own. Realizing that Netscape is probably right about it being a key OS feature, they start incorporating it into their OS shipments for free, because they know that OS shipments are already a money-losing proposition where the only point is to get first chance to sell the user APPLICATIONS.
Meanwhile, as the MS browser slowly catches up with and then beats Netscape's browser in features and performance, the Netscape browser becomes an unstable, pork-filled mess. Whereas Netscape started the browser wars effectively driving the HTML standards process, in the end they found they could barely keep up with the latest standards. Microsoft's standards compliance is, err, creative as well but they manage to stay ahead of the curve more of the time than not.
3) Netscape finds out the hard way that there's no money in OS software, either new or old, and slowly spins out of control. All the while, they invent new "business models" of the week, each smaller in scope until finally they claim to be just a portal and are bought and stripped down for parts.
Microsoft is hardly angelic in this story, but if making fewer mistakes than your challengers is a crime, then I fear we'll have no businesses left.
Is the message a fake? Is it real?
What does this all mean for the future of privacy on the Internet?
Get your answers straight from the man.
Well, I made an assumption too, for which I apologize. I thought you were a US citizen. US citizens should certainly have no excuse for not reading their own Constitution once in a while.
As I understood the way this happened, they used the raw census forms (which are destroyed in most countries after entry) not the summary data. The legality of this and the risks is open to debate, but the point of the original article was that you could identify individuals from the summary data, and that's what I was explaining, and my comment related to the "legal" information.
The way it was related to me, it had nothing to do with the raw forms. As I understood it, supposedly "agregate" data was used to locate Asian-american neighborhoods, which were then swept for Japanese names.
Because that's not the purpose of the census, that's the function of the legislature.
Read the Constitution. It clearly says that the purpose of the census is for the allocation of representatives only.
There are much better ways to identify individuals than using Census data...
Really? Tell that to the Department of Defense. Back in WWII (when they were still called the Department of War), it was census data they used to locate and round up Asian-Americans and put them into concentration camps.
So much for agregation of the data, huh?
Privacy is important. Come see Philip Zimmerman talk about Privacy in the Internet Era.
Very few of these tweaks are "right" or "wrong", except that some of them may sound better or worse to your ears or in your listening environment.
The best idea is to check out a few similarly-appointed models, while mimicing as closely as possible the target listening environment. Think about what you have now and what you like or don't like about how it performs. Then you'll be able to make a choice that works for you. (And audiophile religious cults be damned.)
That said, I think that Yamaha makes some RIGHTEOUS equipment and you should probably take a look at it. I have the 995 and it totally rocks. Got it for less than $1K as well.
Then that's even more reason NOT to vote for Nader.
Nader and the Green Party's program of government intervention will cause MORE pollution, not less.
Because the problem with pollution in America isn't that no one cares, it's that we're using the wrong part of government to work on the problem.
The legislative and executive branches are fundamentally incapable of handling the problem because they are the problem. And Nader just wants to expands their ranks, not address how they deal with anything.
It's those same bureaucrats who can't be bothered to go after real polluters because they work for big government or big corporations. And somehow Nader thinks that if we make new laws and hire new bureaucrats that all of a sudden this problem will go away?
Don't believe me? Then check out who the number 1 polluter is in the US: THE US GOVERNMENT
If you want to reduce pollution, we have to stop using the legislative branch to handle the problem, and start using the courts.
The Libertarian solution is to haul polluters into court and make them pay damages.
It worked against WR Grace, it worked for Erin Brockovich (the real life person), and it will work much better than hiring more armies of bureaucrats and writing new arcane and silly laws.
Vote Small Government
Vote Harry Browne
I'm honestly boggled. How can any reader of /. vote for that anti-tech green-shirt Nader?
The man reportedly refuses to become computer literate.
Is this the guy who you think can be a leader in the 21st century?
Plus, he and his party want to tax you back in the stone age, all while claiming to be attacking "the rich" and "the big corporations". Want a clue? When he says "the rich" HE MEANS YOU
If you really want to rein in corporations, then rein in the government power they use to boss us around.
Vote Small Government.
Vote Libertarian
Vote Harry Browne.
Because "the price of avoiding politics is to be ruled by one's inferiors."
Old words, still true today.
Whatever you do folks, please go out and vote.
Instant Runoff Voting simply isn't the answer.
Besides, there are already nearly 300 Libertarians serving in office, including more than 20 right here in Massachusetts.
Now, the Greens, Reform, and Natural Law, can't say that. Nor can any of the other "wet dog" parties around the nation.
The future of America is the The Libertarian Party
DARE = Democrats Are Ruining Everything
DARE = Dumb-Ass Republicans Elected
The War on Drugs is a failure. So is DARE.
To end the War on Drugs, Vote Libertarian.
Actually, my favorite thing about DARE is when the cops paint confiscated cars with the DARE logos and such. I saw a 'vette painted that way once, and I had to laugh when I imagined the following exchange:
"Peterson, get in here!"
"Yes, Chief?"
"Peterson, your new cruiser is in. The good news, is it's a Corvette."
"Thank you, sir, what's the bad news?"
"The bad news is, we had it painted with that candy-ass DARE shit, so you better watch yourself in the squad room."
Please note that the original author didn't say that the current method of rewarding people for their IP is necessarily the best one, only that they felt that honest work deserves to be rewarded.
Virtually all Libertarians (and hopefully, people in general) would agree with that statement, though Libertarians would also be quick to point out that what an artist thinks is just compensation and what the market thinks may be and often are two different things.
I personally feel that the anti-Napster musicians are being woefully short-sighted about the new technologies. Probably it will just take a few more examples of artists making it big without punishing the fans before the idea will really catch on.
PS. I'm voting for Harry Browne. :)
Nader will replace the drug war with a new War On Income
Absolutely true. And there's no room for privacy under a policy of 100% Income Taxes for folks who make more than the Green's rather arbitrary idea of a decent income.
If you want to end the War on Drugs, and you want the government to keep its hands off the economy, there's only one vote: Harry Browne, Libertarian for President
Let's not forget the demand side of this equation. Truth is, we have so much need for IT professionals and the demand so far outstrips the supply that we're being forced to take on virtually any warm body who can claim a passing familiarity with computers.
Those of us who are a little older will probably remember when the newest programmers weren't given anything much bigger than a few functions to write and maintain. No so anymore, when the need for programming talent has driven prices up so far that all some organizations can afford are those same "new" programmers.
When I started writing code, the algorithms that were especially clever, useful, or elegant used to get collected by engineers and bound into books. You're a crusty old one these days if you have an old, xerographed copy of "The Hackmem" or even know what it is. Doubly so for old copies of "Collected Algorithms of the ACM" which used to be distributed on microfiche!
Instead, these days you get a chorus of untrained "experts" in "visual programming" who loudly proclaim that algorithms are unnecessary to programming!
Don't believe me? Last year, Visual Basic Programmer's Journal had the temerity to publish an article showing some very basic algorithms and how they could be applicable in VB programming. The response from readers was stunning. One said: "I have worked in VB for 10 years and NEVER used an algorithm."
As a manager of software developers, and one who came up through the ranks as quite a good software engineer, I have been used to using a light touch when trying to get developers to improve their practices, because most had pretty good practices and had an extraordinary pride in them.
These days, I'm finding that I often need to switch completely to playing the role of the drill sergeant, because so many engineers lack even the most basic skills for developing clean, reliable, understandable code.
I looked at the supplied video on the site, and the scale looks, err, funny to me.
Do we know for sure that this thing is real?
Or, said another way, why do the "coins" in the three-coin, figure-eight demo jog around so much when nothing else in the frame seems to move?
Democrats can't be trusted.
Republicans can't be trusted.
It's time to find some folks who understand privacy
My definition of management (and I've been doing it for over a decade now) is taking personal responsibility for the overall success of the project, rather than just for your own contribution to it.
There are many books that can help, and many, many more that do little except enrich their publishing companies. (See anything by Ken Blanchard, especially things on Situational Leadership.)
Remember these rules for starters and you'll be OK:
Some days, you'll beg to be just a "regular" engineer again. All managers do.
But remember that when everything works out, it can be one of the most rewarding jobs out there. In management, you can make more good software happen than you can alone. And all of the sacrifices will make software releases that much more fulfilling.