If humanity is responsible for this "unprecedented" climate change, how does one explain the (warm) climate in 800 AD? The very problem statement refutes the conclusion of the article.
is always ignorance and stupidity. Using politics to validate your existence is no more useful than using religion to validate your existence. Or using the brand of your cigarette to validate your existence.
Until we find a way to improve the native intelligence of the general population through genetic modification nothing will change. The only other alternative is restricting the franchise to those of demonstrable intellectual competency, a policy explicitly forbidden by the Supreme Court in the early 1970's.
All of this was a long-winded way of saying that nothing will change in the immediate future.
What a boondoggle. This will make the Concorde project (estimated cost per plane: $9.8M, actual cost per plane $90M) look like a success. The French are so Socialist that they think that Chirac is a Capitalist.
We conceived it, designed it, built it and paid for it. You, who couldn't have done any of the four, are fortunate enough to benefit from our creation for almost none of the cost. Now you, who hate us and envy us, want to control what you couldn't create on your own.
Why on Earth would anyone invest $20 in this awful, awful, awful movie? These turkeys have been pathetic since "The Empire Strikes Back." The inclusion of Ewoks was the beginning of the end; talk about dumbing down something already dumb.
Sending $20 more to George Lucas is like giving a crackhead another rock. Just say no.
Look, these guys are trying to do the right thing to inspire trust and confidence in the integrity of their software. What they are doing is entirely reasonable and proper. Just because they want to make real money from their code doesn't mean they are evil. Just because you think that everyone should release everything under the GPL, doesn't mean that they should be forced to accept your values. The release license is the choice of the author; never forget that.
The purpose behind this excercise is to promote trust in the integrity of the electronic voting process; not to release Open Source voting software.
Statements like the above are very misleading. On most of the major projects I have worked with over the last five years, time to project launch was always the number one consideration. In every case, I was ground relentlessly by senior management on a continuous basis about time-to-launch. If I stated that a project would take eight months to complete, the next question from senior management would be on ways to release the product in six months.
The following day, I would get grilled on how to release the product in five months, or maybe four months.
I experienced these same conditions while working for a number of different employers; when I pushed back on the release dates, a reason always appeared why our company would collapse in wreakage if the project were not released by the nearer deadline.
I and the programmers that I have worked with finished some projects on time; others we did not. We worked in deliberate languages (C, C++, Java) and RAD languages (Perl, Python). The specifics of the project changed, but the mentality of an uninformed management never changes.
I am very proud of what we achieved, bugs and all. I think that we did a hell of a job under very difficult circumstances.
The statement that software bugs cost American industry $60 Billion makes me laugh when I hear it. For the most part, the bugs are caused by management refusal to spend the time and money it takes to write bug free software.
The overwhelming majority of bugs can be easily eliminated by good developers if the following elements are in place:
Good Functional Specifications Explicit Coding Standards Unit Testing of Code Modules Peer Review Sane Project Deadlines
There's not much else to it. That, and the desire to do good work will fix 90% of the so-called problem.
Slashdot Mirror
It's nice to see tha gun control has been so successful in the UK. Keep up the good work!
Syncerus
If humanity is responsible for this "unprecedented" climate change, how does one explain the (warm) climate in 800 AD? The very problem statement refutes the conclusion of the article.
Syncerus
is always ignorance and stupidity. Using politics to validate your existence is no more useful than using religion to validate your existence. Or using the brand of your cigarette to validate your existence.
Until we find a way to improve the native intelligence of the general population through genetic modification nothing will change. The only other alternative is restricting the franchise to those of demonstrable intellectual competency, a policy explicitly forbidden by the Supreme Court in the early 1970's.
All of this was a long-winded way of saying that nothing will change in the immediate future.
Syncerus
What a boondoggle. This will make the Concorde project (estimated cost per plane: $9.8M, actual cost per plane $90M) look like a success. The French are so Socialist that they think that Chirac is a Capitalist.
Unreal.
Never ascribe to villainy what simple incompetence will explain.
Syncerus
We conceived it, designed it, built it and paid for it. You, who couldn't have done any of the four, are fortunate enough to benefit from our creation for almost none of the cost. Now you, who hate us and envy us, want to control what you couldn't create on your own.
Sounds reasonable to me. Not.
Syncerus
Why on Earth would anyone invest $20 in this awful, awful, awful movie? These turkeys have been pathetic since "The Empire Strikes Back." The inclusion of Ewoks was the beginning of the end; talk about dumbing down something already dumb.
Sending $20 more to George Lucas is like giving a crackhead another rock. Just say no.
Look, these guys are trying to do the right thing to inspire trust and confidence in the integrity of their software. What they are doing is entirely reasonable and proper. Just because they want to make real money from their code doesn't mean they are evil. Just because you think that everyone should release everything under the GPL, doesn't mean that they should be forced to accept your values. The release license is the choice of the author; never forget that.
The purpose behind this excercise is to promote trust in the integrity of the electronic voting process; not to release Open Source voting software.
You should commend these guys, not snarl at them.
Anyone who wants the job, isn't sane enough to do it properly.
Some idiot can be found to volunteer for anything.
Syncerus
This is Dangerously Cheesy.
Statements like the above are very misleading. On most of the major projects I have worked with over the last five years, time to project launch was always the
number one consideration. In every case, I was ground relentlessly by senior management on a continuous basis about time-to-launch. If I stated that a project would take eight months to complete, the next question from senior management would be on ways to release the product in six months.
The following day, I would get grilled on how to release the product in five months, or maybe four months.
I experienced these same conditions while working for a number of different employers; when I pushed back on the release dates, a reason always appeared why our company would collapse in wreakage if the project were not released by the nearer deadline.
I and the programmers that I have worked with finished some projects on time; others we did not. We worked in deliberate languages (C, C++, Java) and RAD languages (Perl, Python). The specifics of the project changed, but the mentality of an uninformed management never changes.
I am very proud of what we achieved, bugs and all. I think that we did a hell of a job under very difficult circumstances.
The statement that software bugs cost American industry $60 Billion makes me laugh when I hear it. For the most part, the bugs are caused by management refusal
to spend the time and money it takes to write bug free software.
The overwhelming majority of bugs can be easily eliminated by good developers if the following elements are in place:
Good Functional Specifications
Explicit Coding Standards
Unit Testing of Code Modules
Peer Review
Sane Project Deadlines
There's not much else to it. That, and the desire to do good work will fix 90% of the so-called problem.