My time is valuable to me. My friends value their time as well. Tivo's value is not just time shifting, but also cutting out crap. If I have to pay Apple a premium to do this for me and watch only a few shows because of the cost, to me that's better than watching crapisode after crapisode put only solely for the purpose of having something to insert commercials into. And if I feed the demand for something which competes against AdverCrapIsodes(r) it's a bonus.
- because their town is too small to sustain a globally competitive cost-cutting store & the collection of mom and pot stores (which tend to keep money in the area btw).
So then is it good or bad that they can work at WalMart?
Bad - Noone who works at Wal-mart should be trying to live off their income. Wal-mart, goodwill and lower positions at fast-food franchises are only good for sustaining kids who live at home and are trying to save up for the next step (more education, training, funding for a small business venture) in their progress. If you are trying to live off the money you are in the wrong place!
If WalMart disappeared these people would never work again?
Yes, because that implies that wal-mart came into the area which causes smaller businesses to close down. They have now become the nipple that feeds, but too little. So when that is gone, nothing is left. Don't consider it a stright shot, but more of a one-two punch.
Would people be better off if WalMart had, in exchange for less growth, always paid its employees more than they were willing to work for?
People would be better off if the threshold for putting in a wal-mart store was a higher population and regional income.
You are ignoring a commonly understood side-effect of capitalism and competition: In a pure environment prices go down, efficiency goes up, and employees which are part of the value chain suffer.
Don't credit the midwest too much - the majority of the population in the US is along the east and west coast. Having said that, also keep in mind that the US grade school education system SUCKS.
The fact that I'm having a child in this state scares the hell out of me.
My point is, using a computer, earning enough to have discretionary spending money and finding any value in a java enabled mobile phone versus a new car requires some degree of intelligence. This is an uphill battle for most people in the US, who are regarded as "resources" by anyone with an MBA and as the unwashed masses by anyone doing very well.
Sure it can fix healthcare! Just look what it's done for the FAA, Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Russian submarine K-141 Kursk, and the myriad of undisclosed technology related disasters to pick from.
We don't have this right yet. Perhaps somewhere else, but definately not in the US. I just left a project where IBM had their weasels walking the halls and inviting executives to the golf course in an effort to grab a sale versus a really good product that specialized in the area my client was purchasing for. We need about another 30 years in this country before anything but specialized systems are applied against healthcare.
Hell, fix the transportation system first and replace cars with PRT's and you'll eliminate a good percent of the hospital visits in the first place.
I bet they are really looking forward to the when the green power light rail system becomes so popular that everyone uses it instead and they can just move the wind turbines to barriers around the rail line instead.
yes, you can find out. Almost all companies who do lookups against card information have trace information. A court will be able to get that information.
Does anyone else feel like automating our current transportation is insanity compared to building a new transportation system that actually lends itself to automation?
Why are we trying so hard to make something designed to be operated by a human computerized so it stays on the road when we can make a road with rails on it?
Sounds like the RIAA needs to stop paying it's lawyers and start lobbying for faster movement to ipV6 instead. Then it won't have to rely on ISP's to cough up address-people relationships. They will be implicit in the registration of the IP block.
Okay, if the ultra-violent rape porn is obviously bad, is the hardcore bondage porn? What about the goofy S&M porn? Okay, so how about the no-whips-involved-but-she-likes-to-be-slapped porn? The pull-my-hair porn? Okay what about the stick stuff in me porn? Where in the spectrum of fetishes people have is the line drawn? Is it okay to admit to children that there is a such thing as a fetish?
Personally, I don't think any of it is something that can't be explained to kids. Heck, it might even enlighten them to understand why they like being chased sometimes. Desire doesn't have to be sexual and porn would be far less shocking as an adult if it wasn't such a big deal as a kid.
If they really want to create a think of the children law, make a law requiring you to have a license before having your third child and training before having your first. Porn is far less damaging to a child than wreckless parenting.
There are actually merits to having a computer look like a piece of equipment and not an office ornamant which seem to escape the media these days. There are also several examples of where a piece of equipment made "too friendly" has been to the detriment of the person using it.
When a computer looks like equipment it's taken more seriously. If a computer makes noise when it's on, demands interaction with a prompt and has a consistent, unornamented interface it adds a level of seriousness to the business of using it. It says take me seriously because performing operations with me is serious business.
When a computer looks like candy it's "played", not "worked" with. It's left in a corner showing something flashy and useless on the screen. It's an expensive DVD player. According to the Apple ads, this is the direction we "want" to go. I disagree.
A computer can call the people you have appointments with and tell them you will be there. A computer can operate your entire home's systems. A computer can allow an intruder into your home if you are careless with it. This is a piece of equipment, not a video gaming conduit. It ought to be taken seriously.
I believe this because of an existing counterexample of candy-coated machines gone wrong: The automobile. Interactive video, cell phones, leather interiors, a million and one shapes and sizes - these are strongly correlated to the careless nature with which we see people driving. Driving into schoolbusses, driving into other drivers, and driving drunk are easy cases to cite. A group of people who treat their cars like toys is the same group that drives their cars like children, not adults. These people get hurt with their cars because the mindset that makes them want candy coatings is the mindset that makes them drive outside the limits on the environment they are in. If your car is plain, stiff and hurts to sit in for to long, you take it seriously.
A computer can do damage to you just like your car can. Take it seriously.
Please sir, do tell us when *exactly* you've been to the moon and when *exactly* you intend to write the code necessary to identify a child on a community system with a subset of people who pride their anonymity?
I love how politicians claim abilities beyond their own capacity.
Yeah, think how much havoc you can wreak as a suspected terrorist by just opening up the local phone book, picking seven "tough guy" sounding names and incessently harrassing them? They'd never board a plane again
Please tell me where you are so I can move into your district before my kid grows to be your age! I currently live in Marietta, GA and the stupid levels to which religious brainwashing goes here is enough to make a sentient being cry.
To suggest that I'm not qualified to make this assessment is to suggest I'm not qualified to live my life because I have no prior experience living a life. Anyone with reading comprehention and an internet connection can figure this out.
1) The dates aren't important - even software doesn't stick to a date - do you seriously think a war does? 2) You could compare the duration of the occupation in Iraq to that of the occupation of German and Japan with military bases - we currently have four major bases in Iraq which will will not be turning over to the Iraqis. They will stage the attack on Iran - The Iraq war was a ground war because of the contruction required. The Iran war will be an air and naval war because of the goal and the poximity to water. The goal is to bomb them back in time - think Lebenon and Libya. We have three major branches you know, and only one is taxed right now. 3) There are no conditions for stopping the war - every excuse will be made until it comes about - the precursorory military bases *are* the beginning of the war. 4) We don't care who runs Iran "afterwards", since the goal is just to make them ineffectual. 5) We would use tactical nukes, sure. We'll blame it on an explosion at their new nuclear facilities and the inexperience of their scientists. 6) As long as they can't use their own fields, we don't care about their oil - Iraqs is already being manhandled. 7) The terrorist/insurgents don't affect the plan - they just show up on tv as statistics. 8) We pay for it by reducing scuttling social programs in the US and recirculating the money back into US corporations to do the work - Everyone likes to quote the $1 billion here, $4 billion there numbers on the cost of Iraq, but then the money just comes back to US corps it's not really paid out, is it? Notice we don't use many overseas contractors except individual people?
The US foreign policy does not make sense for the US. Ask yourself a question instead of me - who does the US foreign policy make perfect sense for? What other country?
Currently the US foreign policy is driven by warmongering and profiteering. The US military has been outsourced to corporate mercenaries and little regard is given to the well-being of the actual force.
We're about to start a navel and air war with Iran, we're ignoring Darfur, we're disregarding our own people in their time of need (Katrina) and we're supporting countries on questionable moral ground.
If anything qualifies as evil, all that does. So if Google is avoiding paying taxes to a government which executes such evil behavior I'd say they're living up to their mantra.
So what gives? Did the execs sign an exclusive contract with Apple? How is it they have a strangle hold when the RIAA has the copyrights to the content? What stops them from using Microsofts store (hehehehe)?
They have access to multiple distribution channels and when one becomes successful enough to obtain brand identity they cry foul!
Some shit, different episode. These guys aren't playing with a full deck. Or at least they think we aren't.
You might get your wish. I have tons of friends in Panama City and Alabama pining over a Fry's convenient to them. One in Peachtree City would cater to the rest of Georgia since Atlanta is in the northern region of the state. They may still find it a worthwhile endeavor with Macon, Columbus and all points sound as a consumer base.
I disagree. There is a one for one between the text of a program and the object or byte code. So there is no difference between the two phases. They have merged. The reason the software industry is broken is because too many people have your opinion about it. The design should design class, sequence, activity and deployment models until the *empty* code compiles but does nothing and is in the proper form to deploy. When a section of the system (eg, deployable artifact or package) reaches this point, it should be handed off to the programmer who then fills in the parts they specialize in and refers to a library of past solutions. If they don't understand the design or the notes in the comments aren't complete enough for a single or few methods, they talk to the designer.
And at this point, I'll call you out. I have three high school students with introductory java programming skills and excellent typing skills working with me on a project. This works. But it's important that the programmers don't think it's part of their job to screw with the class's methods - they look at each method as a homework problem and I get to stay up in Enterprise Architect and push out models and eat crow when I assign them to something that won't work. When I get to the point where I can scale this up to ten's of people, I'm going to test hiring further out of town - I think there is *huge* potential in the rural US and high school graduates to fill in the demand for good software.
we're skilled professionals tackling very hard problems and more angry about everything broken in the process (mostly imposed by those with no ground level experience trying to impose their vision) than you will ever be.
Last thought - you are a bag of wind if you think you can make an assertion like this without ever having met me. If you get rid of bullshit comments like this your remarks would be far more respectable.
I have the capacity to tell you how to make software, I make it as well.
Listen to yourself!!!! In 1, you assert that problem solving is better than specialization, and yet you say in the same breath, people with good problem solving skills are rare and invaluable!
that *is* the definition of a practice ripe for industrialization! Craftsmen are rare so move from a craft to a process.
Regarding 2, you are complimenting software dev in fire-fighting mode. The real efficiency is in a mix of the two. You don't create a spec just to create a spec. You create it to dictate what the software should accomplish.
Here are the things missing in your perception of process based industrialization of software. It's my opinion that these are part of what causes you to dismiss it as better than just having talented problem solvers who happen to be disciplined people:
* Your build must fail if the design of the software doesn't match the requirements spec. This is automatable. * Your build must fail if your code test coverage isn't 100% of the unit testable code. * Your architect must *never* write a piece of code. * Your designer must only write code to solve difficult problems which haven't been solved before. * Existing code where past problems were solved (including proof-of-concept code from the previous bullet) must be easily searchable by the programmers. * The designer must create all methods (not fill them in, but produce the method signatures). * If the programmer adds or removes methods, the build must fail. The design must be kicked back to the designer. * The programming team should have a shared person to consult if they run into a lack of knowledge (eg, what is the best way to discard a socket connection these days)
If you write software this way, by the third or fourth project this team would produce exceptionally high quality code. It doesn't matter if the requirements spec changes because the build stops until you put it in line with the new changes, so iterations are supported. The designer who has their first project kicked back a hundred times will be better the second go around. The programmer who never has to solve a problem, but simply has to look up a solution and shape it to fit the occasion will master their domain.
I agree. This is what happened to engineering. If you are a large organization, you have engineers in house. If you aren't, you hire out to a separate engineering firm with several clients. We will have arrived when Software architecture bears similiar characteristics - A software architecture firm with several clients.
Slashdot Mirror
My time is valuable to me. My friends value their time as well. Tivo's value is not just time shifting, but also cutting out crap. If I have to pay Apple a premium to do this for me and watch only a few shows because of the cost, to me that's better than watching crapisode after crapisode put only solely for the purpose of having something to insert commercials into. And if I feed the demand for something which competes against AdverCrapIsodes(r) it's a bonus.
In my little world, this guy is off target.
People pay to get their time & choice back.
Why is it the only job they can get?
- because their town is too small to sustain a globally competitive cost-cutting store & the collection of mom and pot stores (which tend to keep money in the area btw).
So then is it good or bad that they can work at WalMart?
Bad - Noone who works at Wal-mart should be trying to live off their income. Wal-mart, goodwill and lower positions at fast-food franchises are only good for sustaining kids who live at home and are trying to save up for the next step (more education, training, funding for a small business venture) in their progress. If you are trying to live off the money you are in the wrong place!
If WalMart disappeared these people would never work again?
Yes, because that implies that wal-mart came into the area which causes smaller businesses to close down. They have now become the nipple that feeds, but too little. So when that is gone, nothing is left. Don't consider it a stright shot, but more of a one-two punch.
Would people be better off if WalMart had, in exchange for less growth, always paid its employees more than they were willing to work for?
People would be better off if the threshold for putting in a wal-mart store was a higher population and regional income.
You are ignoring a commonly understood side-effect of capitalism and competition: In a pure environment prices go down, efficiency goes up, and employees which are part of the value chain suffer.
http://www.edweek.org/media/2006/06/16/dcfinal_1s
Don't credit the midwest too much - the majority of the population in the US is along the east and west coast. Having said that, also keep in mind that the US grade school education system SUCKS.
http://www.ratemyteachers.com/
I live in Georgia:
http://www.edweek.org/media/2006/06/19/41s-pipeli
The fact that I'm having a child in this state scares the hell out of me.
My point is, using a computer, earning enough to have discretionary spending money and finding any value in a java enabled mobile phone versus a new car requires some degree of intelligence. This is an uphill battle for most people in the US, who are regarded as "resources" by anyone with an MBA and as the unwashed masses by anyone doing very well.
Perhaps, but I accidentally took a leg off of mine too. His name is Skip.
Sure it can fix healthcare! Just look what it's done for the FAA, Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Russian submarine K-141 Kursk, and the myriad of undisclosed technology related disasters to pick from.
We don't have this right yet. Perhaps somewhere else, but definately not in the US. I just left a project where IBM had their weasels walking the halls and inviting executives to the golf course in an effort to grab a sale versus a really good product that specialized in the area my client was purchasing for. We need about another 30 years in this country before anything but specialized systems are applied against healthcare.
Hell, fix the transportation system first and replace cars with PRT's and you'll eliminate a good percent of the hospital visits in the first place.
I bet they are really looking forward to the when the green power light rail system becomes so popular that everyone uses it instead and they can just move the wind turbines to barriers around the rail line instead.
yes, you can find out. Almost all companies who do lookups against card information have trace information. A court will be able to get that information.
Does anyone else feel like automating our current transportation is insanity compared to building a new transportation system that actually lends itself to automation?
Why are we trying so hard to make something designed to be operated by a human computerized so it stays on the road when we can make a road with rails on it?
Sounds like the RIAA needs to stop paying it's lawyers and start lobbying for faster movement to ipV6 instead. Then it won't have to rely on ISP's to cough up address-people relationships. They will be implicit in the registration of the IP block.
Okay, if the ultra-violent rape porn is obviously bad, is the hardcore bondage porn? What about the goofy S&M porn? Okay, so how about the no-whips-involved-but-she-likes-to-be-slapped porn? The pull-my-hair porn? Okay what about the stick stuff in me porn? Where in the spectrum of fetishes people have is the line drawn? Is it okay to admit to children that there is a such thing as a fetish?
Personally, I don't think any of it is something that can't be explained to kids. Heck, it might even enlighten them to understand why they like being chased sometimes. Desire doesn't have to be sexual and porn would be far less shocking as an adult if it wasn't such a big deal as a kid.
If they really want to create a think of the children law, make a law requiring you to have a license before having your third child and training before having your first. Porn is far less damaging to a child than wreckless parenting.
Nah, just trying to prove a point to a friend,
That you can write a few paragraphs making *any* argument and get at least a few people tagging it interesting or insightful.
Slashdot is dead.
There are actually merits to having a computer look like a piece of equipment and not an office ornamant which seem to escape the media these days. There are also several examples of where a piece of equipment made "too friendly" has been to the detriment of the person using it.
When a computer looks like equipment it's taken more seriously. If a computer makes noise when it's on, demands interaction with a prompt and has a consistent, unornamented interface it adds a level of seriousness to the business of using it. It says take me seriously because performing operations with me is serious business.
When a computer looks like candy it's "played", not "worked" with. It's left in a corner showing something flashy and useless on the screen. It's an expensive DVD player. According to the Apple ads, this is the direction we "want" to go. I disagree.
A computer can call the people you have appointments with and tell them you will be there. A computer can operate your entire home's systems. A computer can allow an intruder into your home if you are careless with it. This is a piece of equipment, not a video gaming conduit. It ought to be taken seriously.
I believe this because of an existing counterexample of candy-coated machines gone wrong: The automobile. Interactive video, cell phones, leather interiors, a million and one shapes and sizes - these are strongly correlated to the careless nature with which we see people driving. Driving into schoolbusses, driving into other drivers, and driving drunk are easy cases to cite. A group of people who treat their cars like toys is the same group that drives their cars like children, not adults. These people get hurt with their cars because the mindset that makes them want candy coatings is the mindset that makes them drive outside the limits on the environment they are in. If your car is plain, stiff and hurts to sit in for to long, you take it seriously.
A computer can do damage to you just like your car can. Take it seriously.
I don't really know that anybody's proven that a random collection of people doing their own thing actually creates value.
Did anyone else think of open source software after reading this quote?
Please sir, do tell us when *exactly* you've been to the moon and when *exactly* you intend to write the code necessary to identify a child on a community system with a subset of people who pride their anonymity?
I love how politicians claim abilities beyond their own capacity.
Yeah, think how much havoc you can wreak as a suspected terrorist by just opening up the local phone book, picking seven "tough guy" sounding names and incessently harrassing them? They'd never board a plane again
Please tell me where you are so I can move into your district before my kid grows to be your age! I currently live in Marietta, GA and the stupid levels to which religious brainwashing goes here is enough to make a sentient being cry.
To suggest that I'm not qualified to make this assessment is to suggest I'm not qualified to live my life because I have no prior experience living a life. Anyone with reading comprehention and an internet connection can figure this out.
1) The dates aren't important - even software doesn't stick to a date - do you seriously think a war does?
2) You could compare the duration of the occupation in Iraq to that of the occupation of German and Japan with military bases - we currently have four major bases in Iraq which will will not be turning over to the Iraqis. They will stage the attack on Iran - The Iraq war was a ground war because of the contruction required. The Iran war will be an air and naval war because of the goal and the poximity to water. The goal is to bomb them back in time - think Lebenon and Libya. We have three major branches you know, and only one is taxed right now.
3) There are no conditions for stopping the war - every excuse will be made until it comes about - the precursorory military bases *are* the beginning of the war.
4) We don't care who runs Iran "afterwards", since the goal is just to make them ineffectual.
5) We would use tactical nukes, sure. We'll blame it on an explosion at their new nuclear facilities and the inexperience of their scientists.
6) As long as they can't use their own fields, we don't care about their oil - Iraqs is already being manhandled.
7) The terrorist/insurgents don't affect the plan - they just show up on tv as statistics.
8) We pay for it by reducing scuttling social programs in the US and recirculating the money back into US corporations to do the work - Everyone likes to quote the $1 billion here, $4 billion there numbers on the cost of Iraq, but then the money just comes back to US corps it's not really paid out, is it? Notice we don't use many overseas contractors except individual people?
The US foreign policy does not make sense for the US. Ask yourself a question instead of me - who does the US foreign policy make perfect sense for? What other country?
Currently the US foreign policy is driven by warmongering and profiteering. The US military has been outsourced to corporate mercenaries and little regard is given to the well-being of the actual force.
We're about to start a navel and air war with Iran, we're ignoring Darfur, we're disregarding our own people in their time of need (Katrina) and we're supporting countries on questionable moral ground.
If anything qualifies as evil, all that does. So if Google is avoiding paying taxes to a government which executes such evil behavior I'd say they're living up to their mantra.
So what gives? Did the execs sign an exclusive contract with Apple? How is it they have a strangle hold when the RIAA has the copyrights to the content? What stops them from using Microsofts store (hehehehe)?
They have access to multiple distribution channels and when one becomes successful enough to obtain brand identity they cry foul!
Some shit, different episode. These guys aren't playing with a full deck. Or at least they think we aren't.
You might get your wish. I have tons of friends in Panama City and Alabama pining over a Fry's convenient to them. One in Peachtree City would cater to the rest of Georgia since Atlanta is in the northern region of the state. They may still find it a worthwhile endeavor with Macon, Columbus and all points sound as a consumer base.
correction: There are two in Atlanta. One north in Alpharetta & one east in Gwinnett. Beyond that, I have no idea.
I disagree. There is a one for one between the text of a program and the object or byte code. So there is no difference between the two phases. They have merged. The reason the software industry is broken is because too many people have your opinion about it. The design should design class, sequence, activity and deployment models until the *empty* code compiles but does nothing and is in the proper form to deploy. When a section of the system (eg, deployable artifact or package) reaches this point, it should be handed off to the programmer who then fills in the parts they specialize in and refers to a library of past solutions. If they don't understand the design or the notes in the comments aren't complete enough for a single or few methods, they talk to the designer.
And at this point, I'll call you out. I have three high school students with introductory java programming skills and excellent typing skills working with me on a project. This works. But it's important that the programmers don't think it's part of their job to screw with the class's methods - they look at each method as a homework problem and I get to stay up in Enterprise Architect and push out models and eat crow when I assign them to something that won't work. When I get to the point where I can scale this up to ten's of people, I'm going to test hiring further out of town - I think there is *huge* potential in the rural US and high school graduates to fill in the demand for good software.
we're skilled professionals tackling very hard problems and more angry about everything broken in the process (mostly imposed by those with no ground level experience trying to impose their vision) than you will ever be.
Last thought - you are a bag of wind if you think you can make an assertion like this without ever having met me. If you get rid of bullshit comments like this your remarks would be far more respectable.
I have the capacity to tell you how to make software, I make it as well.
Listen to yourself!!!! In 1, you assert that problem solving is better than specialization, and yet you say in the same breath, people with good problem solving skills are rare and invaluable!
that *is* the definition of a practice ripe for industrialization! Craftsmen are rare so move from a craft to a process.
Regarding 2, you are complimenting software dev in fire-fighting mode. The real efficiency is in a mix of the two. You don't create a spec just to create a spec. You create it to dictate what the software should accomplish.
Here are the things missing in your perception of process based industrialization of software. It's my opinion that these are part of what causes you to dismiss it as better than just having talented problem solvers who happen to be disciplined people:
* Your build must fail if the design of the software doesn't match the requirements spec. This is automatable.
* Your build must fail if your code test coverage isn't 100% of the unit testable code.
* Your architect must *never* write a piece of code.
* Your designer must only write code to solve difficult problems which haven't been solved before.
* Existing code where past problems were solved (including proof-of-concept code from the previous bullet) must be easily searchable by the programmers.
* The designer must create all methods (not fill them in, but produce the method signatures).
* If the programmer adds or removes methods, the build must fail. The design must be kicked back to the designer.
* The programming team should have a shared person to consult if they run into a lack of knowledge (eg, what is the best way to discard a socket connection these days)
If you write software this way, by the third or fourth project this team would produce exceptionally high quality code. It doesn't matter if the requirements spec changes because the build stops until you put it in line with the new changes, so iterations are supported. The designer who has their first project kicked back a hundred times will be better the second go around. The programmer who never has to solve a problem, but simply has to look up a solution and shape it to fit the occasion will master their domain.
This is where software needs to be.
I agree. This is what happened to engineering. If you are a large organization, you have engineers in house. If you aren't, you hire out to a separate engineering firm with several clients. We will have arrived when Software architecture bears similiar characteristics - A software architecture firm with several clients.