I agree, anyway. the poster is obviously because his organization's development environment is changing, but is stating that the part that offends him is that "highly paid developers" are acting as Scrum masters.
The "question" to Slashdot can be paraphrased as "don't you agree that my whining is justified?" Suck it up and write some darn code!
Yes, if when you say "boss", you mean "US Senate", where this bill was introduced.
In any case, supporting that sentiment that elected officials of opposing parties are not significantly distinguishable, note that this bill in its original form was a bipartisan bill, as one of the co-sponsors, Sen Snowe, Olympia J. [ME], is a member of the GOP.
A more comprehensive study would grab a frequency weighted sample that looked at a larger number of students at large public universities, as well as a significant number of students from community colleges.
Unfortunately, when I go to the site, all of the pages under "methods" are giving me 404s.
So, your concern is that this study may not cover what YOU think it ought to be about?
I wonder what this world will be like in fifty years. Will these revolutions help make this a much better place to live? Or will we find a way to fuck it up?
These are not exclusive options. I assert that the answers to both questions is "most certainly, yes."
And NO, I'm not going to back that up with substance; this is Slashdot!
Right on, if by "devolved", you mean "changed", and if by "no idea what you are mumbling" you mean "a pretty darn good idea what you meant".
For better or for worse, the massive propagation of literacy and mass communication has fairly well ensured that modern spoken languages cannot change radically in a short time.
Erhm.... No, you've kept your identity a secret, not your IQ. You've provided enough significant personal information that someone who knew you and stumbled across this comment would almost certainly infer your identity, and thus would know your IQ which you have advertised.
If you were the depressed sort, you might have realized that.;-)
However, that kind of error is a very small price to pay for a positive outlook.
Optimism leaves you more affected by events out of your control. Some of those optimists will be lucky and end up successful, and some will not. If you only look at the successful people you might think optimism causes success, but that's because you didn't notice those for whom optimism didn't work out.
Baloney. Whether you are an optimist or a pessimist is irrelevant to whether you are affected by events out of your control. By definition, they are out of your control, and you are affected by them, regardless of whether you view them positively or negatively.
What is driving "offshoring" is not taxes, it's pure free-market forces. Labor is more expensive here than it is there, so companies attempt to cut costs by moving the labor there. Companies don't increase presence in China because the US raises taxes 5%. They move to China because they can hire a college educated engineer there for $15k a year.
Not entirely. My understanding of what's driving big companies to hire and invest substantially in countries like China is that doing so is part of the price of being allowed to be a significant player. Some countries won't buy a bunch of IBM stuff unless IBM maintains a significant employment presence in the country.
Now I'm thinking about the fact that my major brand Japanese car was built in the US, by US citizens. In some respects, this is a similar situation.
In any case the labor in developing countries is significantly cheaper... though over the past several years I understand that this has been somewhat offset by painfully low retention rates for skilled workers employed by Certain Big Companies in some of those countries. Not sure what the net cost ends up being though.
If you use it, however, you should be aware that many people will consider it a mistake.
Flaunt may have been used as a synonym for flout for many years, but it has been commonly understood (by those familiar with the word flout) to be a mistake for that entire time.
Similarly, although the term "chaise lounge" (commonly accepted in the US) is a creation of people who did not know French, it is considered a mistake by those familiar with the original "chaise longue".
In other words, it is still wrong, for all intensive purposes.
Right. When people break into your house, they're usually after your Stuff. When they break into your ISP, they're after your Information. You're right; these are very different things.
When they get your Stuff, the damage is usually immediate and obvious, and your stuff might even be returned. When they get your information, you have no idea what the damage will be, when it will manifest itself, or where it has gone.
Hmmm.... sounded like "Mr. Academic" was distinctly saying he had not "given up" on the current generation, but that he was finding it even harder to "get through" to his students than in previous years.
It sounds as if "Mr. Academic" was reflecting his frustrating experience, possibly due in part to how he has changed, and partly due to the changes in the attitudes and interests from those he faced when he started his job. This is why it's good that there are new generations of teachers to complement older ones in universities.
Meanwhile, you can improve on this eloquently worded, long-winded, over-generalized, citation-free, and condescending rant. There are some good thoughts here. I expect you'll develop a more focused, compelling style that with a bit of experience.
Mmmm... Jar Jar sucked, but was the least of the problems with the new Star Wars movies. More to the point, dialog, character development and motivation was inane across the board in the new movies.
The point is, people jump on Jar Jar as if that one character was the problem with the movie. The problem as I see it was that George Lucas was not interested in realism, either in physics, or in characters in all six Star Wars movies. He didn't suddenly "go bad" with the new series; he just didn't have any material left that would make a good story without any attention to some kind of realism after he made Empire Strikes Back.
I suppose I can agree with the summary if we are talking about the George Lucas that made "Jar Jar" -- but not the George Lucas I imagine existed before that.
You mean, the George Lucas who decided that space ships in a vacuum behave exactly the same as airplanes in Earth's atmosphere? Or the George Lucas who worked so hard to capture the exact sound of an Imperial Star Destroyer in space? Yeah, he really sold out when he added Jar Jar to The Phantom Menace.
I was going to moderate this, but I couldn't divine a coherent thread that justified any available moderation. Specifically, I wonder:
Is this a criticism of the Democratic or Republican Party politicians, as if they are responsible for the redaction of this document (which doesn't seem likely)?
Or is it meant to say that politicians are consistently in the pockets of corporations?
Or is it a criticism of the press, and the inability of people to say what they think without being labeled unAmerican, (as if this is somehow new, now that George W. Bush is no longer president)?
Or is it a complaint that the recent "town hall" meetings across the country have been effectively neutralized by people who have turned the process from a discussion into a name-calling event?
So why don't you check the facts? There's a fine chart here. Oh, so facts change nothing.
I find it hilarious whenever somebody points to Wikipedia as a source of "the facts". Nevertheless, I'd still probably mod this as "Informative" if I had points to give. Cheers!
U.S. education system: Universities ($50,000 to $400,000+).
Not all of them are so expensive. I went to UF, one of US News and World Reports top 20 public universities. It was about $16,000 in Tuition for four years, before scholarships were applied (And it's dead easy to get a scholarship in the state of Florida). Is it really that dire in the rest of the country?
Not sure what these Swedish prices represent. I assume that $5000 pays for the equivalent of in-state tuition for a top-tier public university in the US.
To put this in perpsective: UC Berkeley - http://registrar.berkeley.edu/Registration/feesched.html
Now, unless it's significantly cheaper to live in Europe, the estimates of cost in Sweden are totally crazy.
At a previous job I asked my boss why we used Oracle and he said that if anything ever went terribly wrong, the company would have someone to sue. Of course, suing someone doesn't restore customer confidence, data, or revenue. No verifiable technical reason, just that OUR lawyers got warm and fuzzy with contractual language that would never, ever get exercised and if it ever did try to sue anyone we'd have run out of money before they dipped into their free soda fund.
Anything that executes code is buggy. Applications, frameworks, libraries, protocol stacks, drivers, bios', FPGAs and microchips. Grow up and deal with it.
First of all, this is not "another stupid babysitter law". It is NOT a law at all.
Second of all, the guidelines are intended to prevent product vendors from selling products they know are defective. Just as it would be unacceptable if an auto company sold a car whose brakes wouldn't work whenever the car was going 72 miles per hour, it would be bad if a software company sold a system that it knew had a defect that could cause data corruption.
I am all in favor of supporting Artists however, and will gladly pay to see them live, I'll buy their merchandise (if its attractive and reasonably priced) and generally try to support them in a way that does not imply having to buy "a license" to listen to their work a finite number of times...
Curious - Does this ill-thought-out policy also apply to actors/actresses and video media?
Hmmm.... I can't speak for the GP, but personally, I am fully supportive of actors and actresses (as well as supporting production artists) who work on live plays, musical productions, and the like. Unfortunately for the actors/actresses, etc, their work usually entails much higher overhead (partly due to the number of people involved) and so my support of their live work is less rewarding to each invidual artist than when I purchase a CD directly from a small local music group that I see live.
Therefore, I also support artists by purchasing recordings of both muscial and dramatic media without necessarily seeing the production live. However, if my recording were likely to stop working after a known number of uses, I would be less inclined to continue supporting the artists by such a purchase.
few years ago all phones were about the same in features and people shopped based on price and coverage. Sprint decided to bottom feed the market with it's pay cash in the store machines to cater to illegals and people who don't have bank accounts or internet access.
Is there any evidence that suggests Sprint was trying to cater to illegal residents (of the US, I assume)? First of all, note that there is a huge population of legal non-resident aliens who work in the US. Second, the areas of my city heavily populated by foriegn nationals are littered with Cricket stores; THEY are the ones who seem to be aggressively pursuing this market. Third, the core of Sprint's subscriber base for many years has been businesses. This comment seems like an inflamatory remark intended to imply that Sprint is blatantly supporting illegal activity.
VZ and AT&T helped to invest in new phones by giving money to Apple and RIM in exchange for exclusive agreements.We're now in a market cycle where people want a good phone that can do everything since coverage is about the same everywhere.Sprint and T-Mobile are screwed because they cater to bottom feeders and now they're complaining. they want the new phones without paying to develop them. AT&T paid Apple almost a billion $$$ to develop the iPhone.
Yes, AT&T and Verizon have engaged in exclusivity agreements with phone developers, as have Sprint and T-Mobile. This is not a new practice, though this comment seems to imply that it is. I'm not sure what the assertion that Sprint and T-Mobile "cater to bottom feeders" means. Does "bottom feeder" mean "a consumer who doesn't want to be locked into an expensive long-term contract?"
Sprint's answer was to fund the Pre which is still in beta. no wonder no one was allowed to see it before launch. if Sprint and T-Mobile want customers they need to help pay for a nice phone on their network with a decent release and all features working. Unlike the Pre which was a disaster. Check all the stories on BoyGeniusReport. Sprint screwed up and is now running to the government.
While AT&T and Verizon "invest in new phones", Sprint "funds" a phone "which is still in beta"? Haven't there been numerous firmware updates for the iPhone since its debut? Also, does "is still in beta" mean "is generally available and for sale on the market?" In my profession, "beta" testing refers to a test cycle that preceeds general release and sale of a product.
The strange thing about this comment is that it appears to suggest that Sprint is somehow abetting criminal activity, throws its money away by supporting new product development, releases the product before it is ready, and is demanding help from the government due to rescue it from its ineptitude. By the way, precisely what is the nature of assistance Sprint is asking from the government? I didn't see that in any of the article links.
At the same time, this comments implies that AT&T and Verizon's similar practices are okay.
It seems to me that phone exclusivity deals, price-fixing, and costly long-term consumer contracts are equally bad regardless of what company uses them. Or am I missing something here?
Slashdot Mirror
Provide Chrome on the PS3, and I'm golden! Please? Google? Sony? Heck, any decent modern browser would be great. Anyone?
Gah! "Insightful", not "Informative"!
I agree, anyway. the poster is obviously because his organization's development environment is changing, but is stating that the part that offends him is that "highly paid developers" are acting as Scrum masters.
The "question" to Slashdot can be paraphrased as "don't you agree that my whining is justified?" Suck it up and write some darn code!
Yes, if when you say "boss", you mean "US Senate", where this bill was introduced.
In any case, supporting that sentiment that elected officials of opposing parties are not significantly distinguishable, note that this bill in its original form was a bipartisan bill, as one of the co-sponsors, Sen Snowe, Olympia J. [ME], is a member of the GOP.
A more comprehensive study would grab a frequency weighted sample that looked at a larger number of students at large public universities, as well as a significant number of students from community colleges.
Unfortunately, when I go to the site, all of the pages under "methods" are giving me 404s.
So, your concern is that this study may not cover what YOU think it ought to be about?
I wonder what this world will be like in fifty years. Will these revolutions help make this a much better place to live? Or will we find a way to fuck it up?
These are not exclusive options. I assert that the answers to both questions is "most certainly, yes."
And NO, I'm not going to back that up with substance; this is Slashdot!
Right on, if by "devolved", you mean "changed", and if by "no idea what you are mumbling" you mean "a pretty darn good idea what you meant".
For better or for worse, the massive propagation of literacy and mass communication has fairly well ensured that modern spoken languages cannot change radically in a short time.
Shift happens.
Posting anonymously, as I keep my IQ a secret
Erhm.... No, you've kept your identity a secret, not your IQ. You've provided enough significant personal information that someone who knew you and stumbled across this comment would almost certainly infer your identity, and thus would know your IQ which you have advertised.
If you were the depressed sort, you might have realized that. ;-)
However, that kind of error is a very small price to pay for a positive outlook.
Optimism leaves you more affected by events out of your control. Some of those optimists will be lucky and end up successful, and some will not. If you only look at the successful people you might think optimism causes success, but that's because you didn't notice those for whom optimism didn't work out.
Baloney. Whether you are an optimist or a pessimist is irrelevant to whether you are affected by events out of your control. By definition, they are out of your control, and you are affected by them, regardless of whether you view them positively or negatively.
What is driving "offshoring" is not taxes, it's pure free-market forces. Labor is more expensive here than it is there, so companies attempt to cut costs by moving the labor there. Companies don't increase presence in China because the US raises taxes 5%. They move to China because they can hire a college educated engineer there for $15k a year.
Not entirely. My understanding of what's driving big companies to hire and invest substantially in countries like China is that doing so is part of the price of being allowed to be a significant player. Some countries won't buy a bunch of IBM stuff unless IBM maintains a significant employment presence in the country.
Now I'm thinking about the fact that my major brand Japanese car was built in the US, by US citizens. In some respects, this is a similar situation.
In any case the labor in developing countries is significantly cheaper... though over the past several years I understand that this has been somewhat offset by painfully low retention rates for skilled workers employed by Certain Big Companies in some of those countries. Not sure what the net cost ends up being though.
Impressively, only 4% of respondents said they wouldn't buy a new 360 because of hardware failures.
You mean "appallingly" right? Talk about low standards.
Not really low standards. Content is King; the 360 has games some folks love.
I think the important note there is:
If you use it, however, you should be aware that many people will consider it a mistake.
Flaunt may have been used as a synonym for flout for many years, but it has been commonly understood (by those familiar with the word flout) to be a mistake for that entire time.
Similarly, although the term "chaise lounge" (commonly accepted in the US) is a creation of people who did not know French, it is considered a mistake by those familiar with the original "chaise longue".
In other words, it is still wrong, for all intensive purposes.
Right. When people break into your house, they're usually after your Stuff. When they break into your ISP, they're after your Information. You're right; these are very different things.
When they get your Stuff, the damage is usually immediate and obvious, and your stuff might even be returned. When they get your information, you have no idea what the damage will be, when it will manifest itself, or where it has gone.
Geez, okay, I get it! It's your lawn... I'll get off of it.
Hmmm.... sounded like "Mr. Academic" was distinctly saying he had not "given up" on the current generation, but that he was finding it even harder to "get through" to his students than in previous years.
It sounds as if "Mr. Academic" was reflecting his frustrating experience, possibly due in part to how he has changed, and partly due to the changes in the attitudes and interests from those he faced when he started his job. This is why it's good that there are new generations of teachers to complement older ones in universities.
Meanwhile, you can improve on this eloquently worded, long-winded, over-generalized, citation-free, and condescending rant. There are some good thoughts here. I expect you'll develop a more focused, compelling style that with a bit of experience.
According to Wikipedia, the Slim model has an external power supply.
Here's a photo of the rear of the unit, where you can see the unusual power connector (lower right) that seems indicative of an external brick.
Or if you have a PS3, you can use a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse. Either way, it would be nice to see keyboard/mouse support in more games.
Mmmm... Jar Jar sucked, but was the least of the problems with the new Star Wars movies. More to the point, dialog, character development and motivation was inane across the board in the new movies.
The point is, people jump on Jar Jar as if that one character was the problem with the movie. The problem as I see it was that George Lucas was not interested in realism, either in physics, or in characters in all six Star Wars movies. He didn't suddenly "go bad" with the new series; he just didn't have any material left that would make a good story without any attention to some kind of realism after he made Empire Strikes Back.
I suppose I can agree with the summary if we are talking about the George Lucas that made "Jar Jar" -- but not the George Lucas I imagine existed before that.
You mean, the George Lucas who decided that space ships in a vacuum behave exactly the same as airplanes in Earth's atmosphere? Or the
George Lucas who worked so hard to capture the exact sound of an Imperial Star Destroyer in space? Yeah, he really sold out when he added Jar Jar to The Phantom Menace.
I was going to moderate this, but I couldn't divine a coherent thread that justified any available moderation. Specifically, I wonder:
Is this a criticism of the Democratic or Republican Party politicians, as if they are responsible for the redaction of this document (which doesn't seem likely)?
Or is it meant to say that politicians are consistently in the pockets of corporations?
Or is it a criticism of the press, and the inability of people to say what they think without being labeled unAmerican, (as if this is somehow new, now that George W. Bush is no longer president)?
Or is it a complaint that the recent "town hall" meetings across the country have been effectively neutralized by people who have turned the process from a discussion into a name-calling event?
So why don't you check the facts? There's a fine chart here. Oh, so facts change nothing.
I find it hilarious whenever somebody points to Wikipedia as a source of "the facts". Nevertheless, I'd still probably mod this as "Informative" if I had points to give. Cheers!
U.S. education system: Universities ($50,000 to $400,000+).
Not all of them are so expensive. I went to UF, one of US News and World Reports top 20 public universities. It was about $16,000 in Tuition for four years, before scholarships were applied (And it's dead easy to get a scholarship in the state of Florida). Is it really that dire in the rest of the country?
Not sure what these Swedish prices represent. I assume that $5000 pays for the equivalent of in-state tuition for a top-tier public university in the US.
To put this in perpsective: UC Berkeley - http://registrar.berkeley.edu/Registration/feesched.html
Now, unless it's significantly cheaper to live in Europe, the estimates of cost in Sweden are totally crazy.
Another stupid babysitter law to protect idiots.
At a previous job I asked my boss why we used Oracle and he said that if anything ever went terribly wrong, the company would have someone to sue. Of course, suing someone doesn't restore customer confidence, data, or revenue. No verifiable technical reason, just that OUR lawyers got warm and fuzzy with contractual language that would never, ever get exercised and if it ever did try to sue anyone we'd have run out of money before they dipped into their free soda fund.
Anything that executes code is buggy. Applications, frameworks, libraries, protocol stacks, drivers, bios', FPGAs and microchips. Grow up and deal with it.
First of all, this is not "another stupid babysitter law". It is NOT a law at all.
Second of all, the guidelines are intended to prevent product vendors from selling products they know are defective. Just as it would be unacceptable if an auto company sold a car whose brakes wouldn't work whenever the car was going 72 miles per hour, it would be bad if a software company sold a system that it knew had a defect that could cause data corruption.
....By suing, they can force twitter to shut down....
Don't tease... we should be so lucky.
I am all in favor of supporting Artists however, and will gladly pay to see them live, I'll buy their merchandise (if its attractive and reasonably priced) and generally try to support them in a way that does not imply having to buy "a license" to listen to their work a finite number of times...
Curious - Does this ill-thought-out policy also apply to actors/actresses and video media?
Hmmm.... I can't speak for the GP, but personally, I am fully supportive of actors and actresses (as well as supporting production artists) who work on live plays, musical productions, and the like. Unfortunately for the actors/actresses, etc, their work usually entails much higher overhead (partly due to the number of people involved) and so my support of their live work is less rewarding to each invidual artist than when I purchase a CD directly from a small local music group that I see live.
Therefore, I also support artists by purchasing recordings of both muscial and dramatic media without necessarily seeing the production live. However, if my recording were likely to stop working after a known number of uses, I would be less inclined to continue supporting the artists by such a purchase.
few years ago all phones were about the same in features and people shopped based on price and coverage. Sprint decided to bottom feed the market with it's pay cash in the store machines to cater to illegals and people who don't have bank accounts or internet access.
Is there any evidence that suggests Sprint was trying to cater to illegal residents (of the US, I assume)? First of all, note that there is a huge population of legal non-resident aliens who work in the US. Second, the areas of my city heavily populated by foriegn nationals are littered with Cricket stores; THEY are the ones who seem to be aggressively pursuing this market. Third, the core of Sprint's subscriber base for many years has been businesses. This comment seems like an inflamatory remark intended to imply that Sprint is blatantly supporting illegal activity.
VZ and AT&T helped to invest in new phones by giving money to Apple and RIM in exchange for exclusive agreements.We're now in a market cycle where people want a good phone that can do everything since coverage is about the same everywhere.Sprint and T-Mobile are screwed because they cater to bottom feeders and now they're complaining. they want the new phones without paying to develop them. AT&T paid Apple almost a billion $$$ to develop the iPhone.
Yes, AT&T and Verizon have engaged in exclusivity agreements with phone developers, as have Sprint and T-Mobile. This is not a new practice, though this comment seems to imply that it is. I'm not sure what the assertion that Sprint and T-Mobile "cater to bottom feeders" means. Does "bottom feeder" mean "a consumer who doesn't want to be locked into an expensive long-term contract?"
Sprint's answer was to fund the Pre which is still in beta. no wonder no one was allowed to see it before launch. if Sprint and T-Mobile want customers they need to help pay for a nice phone on their network with a decent release and all features working. Unlike the Pre which was a disaster. Check all the stories on BoyGeniusReport. Sprint screwed up and is now running to the government.
While AT&T and Verizon "invest in new phones", Sprint "funds" a phone "which is still in beta"? Haven't there been numerous firmware updates for the iPhone since its debut? Also, does "is still in beta" mean "is generally available and for sale on the market?" In my profession, "beta" testing refers to a test cycle that preceeds general release and sale of a product.
The strange thing about this comment is that it appears to suggest that Sprint is somehow abetting criminal activity, throws its money away by supporting new product development, releases the product before it is ready, and is demanding help from the government due to rescue it from its ineptitude. By the way, precisely what is the nature of assistance Sprint is asking from the government? I didn't see that in any of the article links.
At the same time, this comments implies that AT&T and Verizon's similar practices are okay.
It seems to me that phone exclusivity deals, price-fixing, and costly long-term consumer contracts are equally bad regardless of what company uses them. Or am I missing something here?