Testers are a strange bunch, and good ones are hard to find. Find some good ones and cultivate them. They are a lot cheaper than a ticked off client.
Abso-friggin-lutely.
I absolutely detest the view, held in many organizations, that QA as simply a stop-over on the way to development. Great testers *want* to test. It's their passion. And by their very nature, they approach the act of testing differently than a developer. Finding those people is crazy-hard, and when you do find them, you need to hold on tight, as they're absolutely invaluable to the development process.
By the way, I say this as a developer who simply does not have a head for the kind of rigorous, evil, insidious testing that a natural tester can come up with. People like that keep me honest, and make sure that I as a developer, and we as a development organization, produce the best software possible.
As an aside, I don't envy testers at all. Ultimately it's the test group that gets screwed by poorly-defined or recorded requirements, crappy or absent design documents, not to mention cranky developers. And when shit goes south in the field because some requirement wasn't accurately specified and the software fails, its QA that often takes the blame. And, as I say, in a lot of organizations, its QA that constantly has to re-train people as they move out of QA and into development... they really end up getting the short end of the proverbial stick.
Yeah, but reverse engineering a recipe to create an accurate replica is a lot more difficult than copying, say, a piece of software or hardware (after all, I've never come across a Coke clone that actually managed to duplicate the formula accurately).
TED had an interesting talk about patents and innovation from the perspective of the fashion industry, in comparison to the software industry. The point being that the fashion industry has no patent protection, is full of innovation and makes a bucket load of money.
Talk about a crappy analogy. Innovation in the fashion industry doesn't require nearly the same investment in resources and time to bring the idea to market. Thus, if you can put out a design, and make a bunch of cash before the copy-cats come in, you've already justified the initial "innovation".
Furthermore, I would wager that the fashion industry isn't driven by the same type of cross-pollination you see in other fields. And the entire point of patents is to encourage disclosure, in order to enrich the public sphere, while also protecting the inventor so they can profit from their initial investment in time and effort.
Now, I think it's unquestionable that the existing system is broken. Software patent terms are *far* too long. Patent examiners are overloaded, and crappy patents get through far too easily. You need not provide an actual working model of your patent (whether it be a physical device or a software implementation), nor do you need to actually practice the patent in order to enforce it. But the idea, is, in principle, a good one, I think, and I *really* don't think the case of the fashion industry somehow invalidates it.
That said, it could be that, like communism and pure capitalism, the patent system is a nice idea in abstract, but can never truly work in practice...
I'm aware of that. That doesn't make your argument any more logical or reasonable. You're ascribing evil motivations to a group of, what, tens of thousands of people, not to mention the politicians who pass the laws, *and* the people who vote them in, ffs.
If you can't win an argument
There is no argument here. You've fallen back on emotional conspiracy theories and anti-establishment rhetoric to support your position that, somehow, we treat drunk drivers different 'cuz, like, the cops are bad and stuff! It's fucking ridiculous, and you should be ashamed of yourself for even proffering such an "argument".
Fundamentally, I think that's my point... I have absolutely no confidence that I can upgrade an Ubuntu machine safely specifically *because* its a crapshoot. And so it's now simpler for me to actually re-install on a spare partition, test everything to make sure it works, and then migrate over when I'm confident, as then I don't end up spending hours trying to fix a broken system.
Luckily I have enough chops to rectify upgrade problems when they occur, so it isn't an issue either way for me.
Yeah, I've spent way too many years dicking around with semi-broken Linux machines to enjoy or even put up with that kind of crap anymore. It's just not worth the effort when I could be off doing something far more productive.
Catching a drunk driver with a breathalyzer requires tracking them down and making them blow into the thing (the first time) or for an interlock to be installed on their car and functioning correctly. Catching a texter as it happens is a software problem.
You mean with software that doesn't exist yet? Sure. But as I already said, law enforcement hasn't caught up with the technology yet. What part of this don't you understand?
What I got out of your post is that you like run-on sentences... but let's try to dissect this a little...
and that this proves that we are unfairly punishing drivers who are caught driving badly due to alcohol to make it look like we give a fuck about safety on the road... blah blah blah
Yeah, let's say that's what they were saying. Guess what? That's still an idiotic conclusion. Texting while driving is a new phenomenon. It's taking time for law and culture to catch up with technology... after all, remember, for many many years, drunk driving wasn't considered that big of a deal... hell, one need go back just a single generation to see a very different attitude toward the behaviour.
It also demonstrates the difficulty in enforcing such laws. Catching a drunk driver with a breathylizer is pretty easy. But catching a texter as its happening is far more difficult.
I suppose you think that we disenfranchise felons because their opinion has been proven to be useless, too, right?
Do you have any other words you'd like to put in my mouth while you're at it? I mean, you're on such a roll here, why not go nuts?
Why would you equate inaccessible with "dumbed down?"
I didn't. *You* seem to have equated "accessible" with "dumbed down" for reasons I can't seem to fathom.
You're reading this and assuming "dumbed down" necessarily means less capable, and that's not true so you've missed the point.
Then use a different adjective. Ask anyone you know and they'll tell you "dumbed down" is derogatory. If you don't mean to be derogatory, use a different phrase, that one's taken.
So? It's still pleasurable, just like eating alone can be enjoyable, while eating with others is enjoyable for different reasons. Either way, its a human drive being satiated. And it's *certainly* nothing that should trigger a concern for the human species.
Heck, and that's entirely precluding those couples who use pornography as an element in their sexual relationship.
Why? Like eating, sex is a pleasurable biological function. Do you "[worry] about our future as a species" when you discover people pay money for a good meal? If so, why do you view sex differently?
Yup, but keep in mind what you now have is a copy of the Laserdisc transfers, with absolutely no clean up of the audio/video or anything like that, so it looks/sounds a bit rough. Still, *far* superior to VHS or the "enhanced" versions Lucas has stuck us with.
because obviously the command-line is still there and easily accessible, but it's still a dumbed down distro
Why on earth do you equate "accessible" with "dumbed down"? It's not like those configuration files magically vanish when you install Ubuntu. If you want to go hack config files, go nuts, it's basically Debian underneath (minus upstart, these days).
Truly I find this baffling. Apparently complex, difficult-to-use systems are good, but easy-to-use systems are "dumb"... funny, I would've thought the opposite, that any software which makes using the computer *harder than necessary* is dumb, as in poorly written. But no, inaccessibly complex software is good, and accessible software is bad.
Yes, because it is truly the epitome of maturity to suggest that Ubuntu users are idiots who value a "shiny red hammer" over a "well organized toolbox"...
BTW, on CUPS, credit should actually go to Michael Sweet and Easy Software Products, who is the real progenitor of the product (though, like KHTML, Apple has done a good job of taking that project and building on the work of the original authors, who I hope are now very well off for their efforts).
You fix that problem at the start by by purchasing the correct hardware, not installing the correct distribution. I've been doing that since '93, its really quite easy.
Yeah, I've been attempting it since 94', and people like you have been claiming it's "really quite easy" for the last 16 years.
Obviously step 1 is "buy supported hardware". But for years, basic wifi didn't work out of the box in most Linux distros. That had absolutely nothing to do with driver support, and everything to do with the application stack either being insufficient to the task, and the distros doing a crappy job of integrating it properly (wifi before NetworkManager == hell on earth). Similarly, printer support used to be a sore spot, not because the drivers weren't available, but because the software made it an enormous pain in the ass to install them.
Distros like Ubuntu, focused on the user experience, finally polished this crap up (largely thanks to work by others, like RedHat (NetworkManager) and Apple (cups)), so now I don't have to manually fuck around with iwconfig or lpd in order to get a fully-functioning Linux desktop. And thank god for that, because, like I said, I'm *way* over finding that kind of thing fun/cool.
But, of course, the uber-geeks around here would have me believe that the distro I've chosen is "dumbed down" because, god forbid, I don't *have* to mess around with the bowels of my distro in order to get basic functionality to work. Which is weird, because it strikes me that it's far more dumb to waste time fiddling around with config files, when I could be getting real work done, instead...
I'm sorry, but my Debian doesn't need any work or any polishing. It does perfectly well doing what it's meant to do.
I couldn't agree more, actually.
The only reason I might consider giving Debian a shot, again, is their stability, particularly across upgrades, is largely unparalleled in any other distro, which is rather nice on a machine that you use day-to-day, but want to keep up-to-date.
Well, maybe I'm just responding to unbalanced criticism. My experience upgrading (I think) 8.04 -> 8.10 wasn't exactly smooth, and I've heard no end of issues with subsequent upgrades. But, meh, who knows, maybe those are just vocal minorities... problem is, if there *are* issues, it's hard to unfuck a fucked system.:/
I'm not "knocking" Debian at all. Quit being a defensive jackass.
Thanks for the tip, when I was using Debian (which was a couple years ago), I had no need for non-free drivers, and it's unquestionable that Ubuntu integrates them into their system more directly. That said, adding another repo to apt is simple enough, so maybe it is time I test-drive unstable again (particularly since my laptop is now a few years old, and so driver support is no longer an issue).
Slashdot Mirror
Testers are a strange bunch, and good ones are hard to find. Find some good ones and cultivate them. They are a lot cheaper than a ticked off client.
Abso-friggin-lutely.
I absolutely detest the view, held in many organizations, that QA as simply a stop-over on the way to development. Great testers *want* to test. It's their passion. And by their very nature, they approach the act of testing differently than a developer. Finding those people is crazy-hard, and when you do find them, you need to hold on tight, as they're absolutely invaluable to the development process.
By the way, I say this as a developer who simply does not have a head for the kind of rigorous, evil, insidious testing that a natural tester can come up with. People like that keep me honest, and make sure that I as a developer, and we as a development organization, produce the best software possible.
As an aside, I don't envy testers at all. Ultimately it's the test group that gets screwed by poorly-defined or recorded requirements, crappy or absent design documents, not to mention cranky developers. And when shit goes south in the field because some requirement wasn't accurately specified and the software fails, its QA that often takes the blame. And, as I say, in a lot of organizations, its QA that constantly has to re-train people as they move out of QA and into development... they really end up getting the short end of the proverbial stick.
Yeah, but reverse engineering a recipe to create an accurate replica is a lot more difficult than copying, say, a piece of software or hardware (after all, I've never come across a Coke clone that actually managed to duplicate the formula accurately).
TED had an interesting talk about patents and innovation from the perspective of the fashion industry, in comparison to the software industry. The point being that the fashion industry has no patent protection, is full of innovation and makes a bucket load of money.
Talk about a crappy analogy. Innovation in the fashion industry doesn't require nearly the same investment in resources and time to bring the idea to market. Thus, if you can put out a design, and make a bunch of cash before the copy-cats come in, you've already justified the initial "innovation".
Furthermore, I would wager that the fashion industry isn't driven by the same type of cross-pollination you see in other fields. And the entire point of patents is to encourage disclosure, in order to enrich the public sphere, while also protecting the inventor so they can profit from their initial investment in time and effort.
Now, I think it's unquestionable that the existing system is broken. Software patent terms are *far* too long. Patent examiners are overloaded, and crappy patents get through far too easily. You need not provide an actual working model of your patent (whether it be a physical device or a software implementation), nor do you need to actually practice the patent in order to enforce it. But the idea, is, in principle, a good one, I think, and I *really* don't think the case of the fashion industry somehow invalidates it.
That said, it could be that, like communism and pure capitalism, the patent system is a nice idea in abstract, but can never truly work in practice...
When I say "they" I mean cops
I'm aware of that. That doesn't make your argument any more logical or reasonable. You're ascribing evil motivations to a group of, what, tens of thousands of people, not to mention the politicians who pass the laws, *and* the people who vote them in, ffs.
If you can't win an argument
There is no argument here. You've fallen back on emotional conspiracy theories and anti-establishment rhetoric to support your position that, somehow, we treat drunk drivers different 'cuz, like, the cops are bad and stuff! It's fucking ridiculous, and you should be ashamed of yourself for even proffering such an "argument".
Advertising, making a name for yourself, and actually seeing any returns (financial or otherwise) from your distribution is still very difficult.
So do it for fun and keep your day job, just like most other artists...
It's just a crap shoot each time
Fundamentally, I think that's my point... I have absolutely no confidence that I can upgrade an Ubuntu machine safely specifically *because* its a crapshoot. And so it's now simpler for me to actually re-install on a spare partition, test everything to make sure it works, and then migrate over when I'm confident, as then I don't end up spending hours trying to fix a broken system.
Luckily I have enough chops to rectify upgrade problems when they occur, so it isn't an issue either way for me.
Yeah, I've spent way too many years dicking around with semi-broken Linux machines to enjoy or even put up with that kind of crap anymore. It's just not worth the effort when I could be off doing something far more productive.
What you don't understand is that they don't WANT to catch up with technology, they don't CARE
Ahh, now you're speaking for the amorphous, evil "they"... indeed, this conversation has truly devolved. Have a nice day!
Catching a drunk driver with a breathalyzer requires tracking them down and making them blow into the thing (the first time) or for an interlock to be installed on their car and functioning correctly. Catching a texter as it happens is a software problem.
You mean with software that doesn't exist yet? Sure. But as I already said, law enforcement hasn't caught up with the technology yet. What part of this don't you understand?
What I got out of your post is that you like run-on sentences... but let's try to dissect this a little...
and that this proves that we are unfairly punishing drivers who are caught driving badly due to alcohol to make it look like we give a fuck about safety on the road ... blah blah blah
Yeah, let's say that's what they were saying. Guess what? That's still an idiotic conclusion. Texting while driving is a new phenomenon. It's taking time for law and culture to catch up with technology... after all, remember, for many many years, drunk driving wasn't considered that big of a deal... hell, one need go back just a single generation to see a very different attitude toward the behaviour.
It also demonstrates the difficulty in enforcing such laws. Catching a drunk driver with a breathylizer is pretty easy. But catching a texter as its happening is far more difficult.
I suppose you think that we disenfranchise felons because their opinion has been proven to be useless, too, right?
Do you have any other words you'd like to put in my mouth while you're at it? I mean, you're on such a roll here, why not go nuts?
But you know what's really gone unchecked? Texting while driving is as bad or worse than drinking and driving [cnbc.com].
And therefore we should be softer on drunk drivers.
Yes, that logic is truly brilliant. Well done!
Sure, but that's no reason to "[worry] about our future as a species"... well, okay, maybe the ridiculous laws surrounding sex are.
Why would you equate inaccessible with "dumbed down?"
I didn't. *You* seem to have equated "accessible" with "dumbed down" for reasons I can't seem to fathom.
You're reading this and assuming "dumbed down" necessarily means less capable, and that's not true so you've missed the point.
Then use a different adjective. Ask anyone you know and they'll tell you "dumbed down" is derogatory. If you don't mean to be derogatory, use a different phrase, that one's taken.
Pay for porn and you don't actually get the sex.
So? It's still pleasurable, just like eating alone can be enjoyable, while eating with others is enjoyable for different reasons. Either way, its a human drive being satiated. And it's *certainly* nothing that should trigger a concern for the human species.
Heck, and that's entirely precluding those couples who use pornography as an element in their sexual relationship.
Soft porn has no use at all, except maybe to pretend to be porn where real porn doesn't or can't exist.
Apparently, the sad sad creature that you are, you can only be turned on by, what, close-up shots of vulvas and fake tits?
Why? Like eating, sex is a pleasurable biological function. Do you "[worry] about our future as a species" when you discover people pay money for a good meal? If so, why do you view sex differently?
Yup, but keep in mind what you now have is a copy of the Laserdisc transfers, with absolutely no clean up of the audio/video or anything like that, so it looks/sounds a bit rough. Still, *far* superior to VHS or the "enhanced" versions Lucas has stuck us with.
Yeah, its just slow as balls... apt is still, I think, a far better toolset.
because obviously the command-line is still there and easily accessible, but it's still a dumbed down distro
Why on earth do you equate "accessible" with "dumbed down"? It's not like those configuration files magically vanish when you install Ubuntu. If you want to go hack config files, go nuts, it's basically Debian underneath (minus upstart, these days).
Truly I find this baffling. Apparently complex, difficult-to-use systems are good, but easy-to-use systems are "dumb"... funny, I would've thought the opposite, that any software which makes using the computer *harder than necessary* is dumb, as in poorly written. But no, inaccessibly complex software is good, and accessible software is bad.
It's just bizarre.
Yes, because it is truly the epitome of maturity to suggest that Ubuntu users are idiots who value a "shiny red hammer" over a "well organized toolbox"...
BTW, on CUPS, credit should actually go to Michael Sweet and Easy Software Products, who is the real progenitor of the product (though, like KHTML, Apple has done a good job of taking that project and building on the work of the original authors, who I hope are now very well off for their efforts).
You fix that problem at the start by by purchasing the correct hardware, not installing the correct distribution. I've been doing that since '93, its really quite easy.
Yeah, I've been attempting it since 94', and people like you have been claiming it's "really quite easy" for the last 16 years.
Obviously step 1 is "buy supported hardware". But for years, basic wifi didn't work out of the box in most Linux distros. That had absolutely nothing to do with driver support, and everything to do with the application stack either being insufficient to the task, and the distros doing a crappy job of integrating it properly (wifi before NetworkManager == hell on earth). Similarly, printer support used to be a sore spot, not because the drivers weren't available, but because the software made it an enormous pain in the ass to install them.
Distros like Ubuntu, focused on the user experience, finally polished this crap up (largely thanks to work by others, like RedHat (NetworkManager) and Apple (cups)), so now I don't have to manually fuck around with iwconfig or lpd in order to get a fully-functioning Linux desktop. And thank god for that, because, like I said, I'm *way* over finding that kind of thing fun/cool.
But, of course, the uber-geeks around here would have me believe that the distro I've chosen is "dumbed down" because, god forbid, I don't *have* to mess around with the bowels of my distro in order to get basic functionality to work. Which is weird, because it strikes me that it's far more dumb to waste time fiddling around with config files, when I could be getting real work done, instead...
Wow, the fanbois are out in force today... flamebait? Really?
I'm sorry, but my Debian doesn't need any work or any polishing. It does perfectly well doing what it's meant to do.
I couldn't agree more, actually.
The only reason I might consider giving Debian a shot, again, is their stability, particularly across upgrades, is largely unparalleled in any other distro, which is rather nice on a machine that you use day-to-day, but want to keep up-to-date.
Well, maybe I'm just responding to unbalanced criticism. My experience upgrading (I think) 8.04 -> 8.10 wasn't exactly smooth, and I've heard no end of issues with subsequent upgrades. But, meh, who knows, maybe those are just vocal minorities... problem is, if there *are* issues, it's hard to unfuck a fucked system. :/
I'm not "knocking" Debian at all. Quit being a defensive jackass.
Thanks for the tip, when I was using Debian (which was a couple years ago), I had no need for non-free drivers, and it's unquestionable that Ubuntu integrates them into their system more directly. That said, adding another repo to apt is simple enough, so maybe it is time I test-drive unstable again (particularly since my laptop is now a few years old, and so driver support is no longer an issue).