Terrible idea. Happens a lot though. Not created here syndrome doesn't help.
My personal policy is that unless the requirements change radically, or you are facing serious obselence, you should never start over from scratch.
Even if you wind up rewriting 95% of the code, you'll prevent yourself from making the same mistakes that the original developer already sorted out.
It goes something like this:
You find a chunk code that looks entirely unnecessary. You take it out, replacing it with the obvious solution. You run your testing stuff, it's easy since you were starting from a working system, it's all regression testing. You often find that the code actually did do something important, something subtle usually. You rewrite it in a better way, that accomplishes the same thing.
The alternative, starting from scratch, means that you will likely miss the subtle need for that particular thing. You don't have the benefit from starting from something that works.
It seems like it would take longer, but it goes a long way to prevent requirements and their subtle implications from falling through the cracks. You basically have a cryptic book telling you all the little tricky things. If you throw that book away then you have to rediscover them yourself. And even if you keep it, you aren't going to seriously read it in a deep way if you are starting over completely. By the time you understand all the old code fully you could have been rewriting it incrementally.
Somehow I think readers of a site named "Gamasutra" have probably never had a first time. I bet they have never programmed anything either.
Console gamers get consoles because they can't deal with installing video card drivers. Did the author really thing they were programmers, much less compiler programmers?
The judge says he's open to the idea that if Google manually changed the pagerank to zero, then maybe it's defamation, which is a valid reason to bring a suit.
It would be kind of nice if that argument worked.
If that precedent is set, smear campaign people like SPEWS that regularly report non-spammers as spammers for political ends could be slapped down.
Personally, I'm sick of being called a spammer just because of my choice in ISP. It hasn't caused any problems because no sane sysadmin would actually block based on SPEWS, but just the fact that they are spreading such misinformation about thousands of legitimate companies bothers me.
I would disregard any degrees from online universities
I think you should disregard all degrees, but beside that, why would you disregard online universities?
I've gone to physical university and I'm currently going to an online university, and I can tell you it's a hell of a lot more work and learning in the online one.
The classes don't have 500 people in them for one, unlike the physical university I went to. The professor actually interacts with us personally.
It also costs about 5 times more to go online, on the down side.
It's already dead. It's a non-issue. The only reason that people still talk about it is because they have no faith in the free market to punish companies that act like gluttons.
No other languages have problems with major forks. There must be something wrong with Java or there wouldn't be so many forks of it. Blackdown, Sun, GCJ, J2SE, Java 5.0, Java 1.5....
Call me when you settle on one fork like every other language.
It's a dangerous situation. Intelligent people that know how to manage technology, money, and resources are dying off, to be replaced by the mildly retarded in high growth countries like Africa, where average IQ scores generally run from 60-75.
Giving an equal amount of resources to those who are least equipped to handle it would be very stupid.
No, revokability the way we are talking about it here is an authentication problem.
If I have a signed key that people can use to authenticate that I am who I say I am, a key feature is that I can revoke that key, should it become compromised, and generate a new one.
If your biometrics become compromised, it's impossible to revoke them and get new ones.
How can you post with your head shoved so far up your ass?
I don't know what else to say really. If you don't understand such basic things like efficient allocation of limited resources, then I doubt this conversation is very useful.
Google is arguing that pagerank is subjective, not objective. Google is arguing that it is not an automatic formula, and that their employees regularly rate sites, and that's their business if they want to do it that way.
The other side is arguing that Google lies to people and says their ranking is automated and unbiased, but in reality, there are humans diddling the ranks of some sites.
Part of their job is to respect the court and the legal system. If the suits they are part of and the arguments they make are so ridiculous and baseless to be considered an insult to the court, they can be disbarred.
Barratry can be a crime. Vexatious litigation can get you disbarred. Frivolous litigation (in the legal sense, not the tort reformer sense) can carry penalties too.
Slashdot Mirror
There's drag to consider. It might be worth it if the gain on these paint antennas is crappy compared to a real one though.
So we should ban anything enjoyable?
There's no need for people to have physical sex anymore. Why allow people to do it?
Terrible idea. Happens a lot though. Not created here syndrome doesn't help.
My personal policy is that unless the requirements change radically, or you are facing serious obselence, you should never start over from scratch.
Even if you wind up rewriting 95% of the code, you'll prevent yourself from making the same mistakes that the original developer already sorted out.
It goes something like this:
You find a chunk code that looks entirely unnecessary.
You take it out, replacing it with the obvious solution.
You run your testing stuff, it's easy since you were starting from a working system, it's all regression testing.
You often find that the code actually did do something important, something subtle usually.
You rewrite it in a better way, that accomplishes the same thing.
The alternative, starting from scratch, means that you will likely miss the subtle need for that particular thing. You don't have the benefit from starting from something that works.
It seems like it would take longer, but it goes a long way to prevent requirements and their subtle implications from falling through the cracks. You basically have a cryptic book telling you all the little tricky things. If you throw that book away then you have to rediscover them yourself. And even if you keep it, you aren't going to seriously read it in a deep way if you are starting over completely. By the time you understand all the old code fully you could have been rewriting it incrementally.
Somehow I think readers of a site named "Gamasutra" have probably never had a first time. I bet they have never programmed anything either.
Console gamers get consoles because they can't deal with installing video card drivers. Did the author really thing they were programmers, much less compiler programmers?
Anyone who can't read shouldn't reply to my messages!
(Hint: The physical school had the 500 student classrooms. The online school has about 10-15 students in each section, and costs a lot more.)
The judge says he's open to the idea that if Google manually changed the pagerank to zero, then maybe it's defamation, which is a valid reason to bring a suit.
It would be kind of nice if that argument worked.
If that precedent is set, smear campaign people like SPEWS that regularly report non-spammers as spammers for political ends could be slapped down.
Personally, I'm sick of being called a spammer just because of my choice in ISP. It hasn't caused any problems because no sane sysadmin would actually block based on SPEWS, but just the fact that they are spreading such misinformation about thousands of legitimate companies bothers me.
I would disregard any degrees from online universities
I think you should disregard all degrees, but beside that, why would you disregard online universities?
I've gone to physical university and I'm currently going to an online university, and I can tell you it's a hell of a lot more work and learning in the online one.
The classes don't have 500 people in them for one, unlike the physical university I went to. The professor actually interacts with us personally.
It also costs about 5 times more to go online, on the down side.
It's already dead. It's a non-issue. The only reason that people still talk about it is because they have no faith in the free market to punish companies that act like gluttons.
It's also notorious for being used by organized crime.
Here's a hint... Things that are in demand and illegal are sort of the speciality of organized crime!
If you legalized it, there wouldn't be a problem with organized crime and gambling!
No other languages have problems with major forks. There must be something wrong with Java or there wouldn't be so many forks of it. Blackdown, Sun, GCJ, J2SE, Java 5.0, Java 1.5....
Call me when you settle on one fork like every other language.
I went into #java and got yelled at for having this "gcj" installed. They said it was total crap and nothing would work right with it.
At this point, fuck Java. Sick of dealing with the bullshit.
Sounds like what MP3.com did with the beam it service. It was declared illegal too.
You can't keep one central copy of a work and then copy that for customers, even if the customers have proven they own the work.
It's a dangerous situation. Intelligent people that know how to manage technology, money, and resources are dying off, to be replaced by the mildly retarded in high growth countries like Africa, where average IQ scores generally run from 60-75.
Giving an equal amount of resources to those who are least equipped to handle it would be very stupid.
No, revokability the way we are talking about it here is an authentication problem.
If I have a signed key that people can use to authenticate that I am who I say I am, a key feature is that I can revoke that key, should it become compromised, and generate a new one.
If your biometrics become compromised, it's impossible to revoke them and get new ones.
That doesn't solve the problem of nonrevocability.
Adding three weak locks with inherent flaws doesn't solve the problem of your lock being weak, only triples the effort required to get in.
How can you post with your head shoved so far up your ass?
I don't know what else to say really. If you don't understand such basic things like efficient allocation of limited resources, then I doubt this conversation is very useful.
It's a good thing to, in an ideal market, profit is zero.
In other words, an ideal market can't exist. Us Libertarians know this. We aren't stupid.
Hah, just because some other idiot made the same mistake, doesn't make it true.
Fucking retard. Probably doesn't even know what "ROM" stands for.
Treaties and international agreements are not binding. Sorry, play again.
The cost of a shuttle launch, while great, is dwarfed by the day-to-day costs of modern wars.
Modern wars created the space shuttle.
We wouldn't even have launched anything into space if it weren't damned convienent to lob an unstoppable nuke at our enemies from there.
All the rest, just side benefits.
Google admits that humans moved the rank of the site manually. Google is saying that this is their normal MO and that it's their right to do that.
You just proved the case!
Google is arguing that pagerank is subjective, not objective. Google is arguing that it is not an automatic formula, and that their employees regularly rate sites, and that's their business if they want to do it that way.
The other side is arguing that Google lies to people and says their ranking is automated and unbiased, but in reality, there are humans diddling the ranks of some sites.
Part of their job is to respect the court and the legal system. If the suits they are part of and the arguments they make are so ridiculous and baseless to be considered an insult to the court, they can be disbarred.
Barratry can be a crime. Vexatious litigation can get you disbarred. Frivolous litigation (in the legal sense, not the tort reformer sense) can carry penalties too.
For official use only, until released.
Do you fear reprisal for tearing tags off your matress too?