I've come across, been subject to, and written many coding standards during my career and have come to the conclusion that coding standards are, for the most part, useless.
It is much better to let coders program to whatever style they are most comfortable with. Forcing specific bracing and indentation styles just leads to ill-will from most coders and creates a bureaucratic overhead that is more more trouble than it is worth. As long as the style is consistent within a single file, most programmers will have no trouble following it and have no trouble maintaining the code.
The only standard I think is worthwhile, when coding API libraries and such, is a naming standard. For example, a coder should not have to guess whether the method to get a property value is getProperty() or property_get() or propertyValueOf() or whatever. I don't care what the naming standard is, as long as it is consistent across the API.
I once had to do a software install on an ice-breaker. I had to fly out to the east coast, catch a twin-otter from a Canadian Forces base north to middle-of-nowhere-ville, then get flown by helicopter out to do an at sea landing on the ship.
After I arrived I discovered I had left one of the install discs on my desk at work.
Of course, if you want to exchange e-mail with customers, you'll have to make sure they have compatible software and keys (as with any encryption scheme.) Entrust also has a product called Entelligence Messaging Server which can act as an encryption gateway between your company and your customers. It allows your company's employees to communicate securely with people outside the company, without having to deal with key exchanges and all that mess.
I was confused because when I installed on my Windows box, when I first started Firefox it took me to the RC3 welcome page. When I checked the digital signature of the setup exe, it was dated June 11th.
So did RC3 become the final release, and they were just slow to change the welcome page?
I can just envision an Apple commercial for the switch
SC: I'm a smart car SUV: And I'm an SUV SC: You look a little thirsty, SUV. SUV: I am. Ever since the price of gas went up, my owner started rationing my gas consumption. SC: Aww, that's too bad, SUV. SUV: Tell me about it. I mean, I was thirsty enough before. I could drink gas like there was no tomorrow. SC: Well, SUV, if you kept drinking gas like that, there probably would be no tomorrow.
This book was published in October, 2007, and Rails 2.0 was released December, 2007. According to the description on Amazon, only the last example deals with 2.0 at all.
Since there were some rather significant changes introduced in Rails 2.0, it is likely that many of the examples will no longer work as described. I know that is the case with current version Agile Web Development with Rails.
So some scientists managed to decipher and playback a recording of some singing that was encoded 150 years ago. That sounds like a violation of the DMCA anti-circumvention provisions! They'll be getting a letter from the RIAA soon.
There are no Mexicans picking fruit up in Canada... Actually, foreign farm workers from Mexico and the Caribbean are an integral part of Ontario farming. The workers, however, are not illegal but part of a government sponsored "offshore program."
Arthur C. Clarke was one of the biggest inspirations of my life. It was his book Fountains of Paradise that inspired me to study engineering in University, which led me to where I am today.
I once wrote him to tell him that. He was kind enough to write back, saying he was thrilled to be an inspiration to the younger generations.
This article appears to be taking a stupid slant on the statistics that have been gathered. It keeps harping about the "Millenials" (people born after 1980) when really it should say "people in their 20s". My issue is that 20 years from now, the Millenials will be in their 40s, but it will still be the people in their 20s who are the greater risk. The Millenials are not a generation of risk takers, they are currently at the risk taking age.
When I was in my 20s, I was much more risk prone than I am now (in my 40s). Back then I considered it my *right* to be able to install whatever I wanted on a computer, and would be unconditionally annoyed and offended if it was not allowed. Today I am more aware that there are reasons for most restrictions. Yes, some restrictions don't make sense, but a very many do.
This type of thinking was in more aspects of life than just computers. Back in my 20s, I would say that I drove less cautiously than I do today. I drank more heavily, ate poorly, resented having to wear a bike helmet, jay-walked more often, the list goes on. These are all behaviours that I, and most people, grow out of.
Is sending a cease and desist letter going to help at all? Not one bit
This "hack" is out there. All they are doing is attempting to close the barn doors after the horses are all gone, and apparently making the "secret" URL even more public.
DKIM is designed to not require a root of trust for its certificates. Most DKIM installations simply use a free RSA private/public key pair generated using openssl. The private key goes on the SMTP server, and signs all the outgoing messages. The public key is placed on the DNS server servicing the domain. When a DKIM signed message is received, the receiving MTA retrieves the public key via DNS and verifies the signature.
If the signature verifies successfully, all you have proved is that the messages originated from the domain it claims to be from. This does not eliminate spam, since it is possible for iamaspammer.com to DKIM sign emails (DKIM is dead easy to implement), but it does go a long way to preventing a phisher from faking an email from ebay.com or whatever.
Some of the points made in this article are good, but a couple are way off the mark.
He lists as a negative indicator *anyone* who considers programming as a "day job." I know quite a few programmers who consider programming a day job. They come into work at 9, they work for 8 hours, they go home at 5, and then they do something entirely different. But the code that they produce while at work is brilliant. They are extremely bright people who enjoy programming, but don't live and breath it. They would rather do something else while not at work.
He lists as a positive indicator *anyone* who is passionate about technology. Sorry, but I've met a lot of people who are bubbling over with enthusiasm about programming, but can't code worth shit. These are the people dive headfirst into a programming job without any thought of design or architecture, and you end up with an application that uses half a dozen bleeding edge technologies, all bundled together with virtual duct tape, that disintegrates at the first input exception.
Portal is the most finely crafted game I have played in a very long time. I don't think I've played such a good game since my Commodore 64 (M.U.L.E. probably). Sure, I've played lots of fun and engrossing games, but Portal was perfect from beginning to end.
Being able to withstand shoves and kicks is essential if robots are to truly be our buddies, they reckon. The next generation of "friend" robots will also help you hide a body.
Corporate sponsored legislation is hardly a new thing. I have no idea when F.R. Scott published this peom, but I studied it in high school back in the 80s.
National Identity, by F.R. Scott
The Canadian Centenary Council Meeting in Le Reine Elizabeth To seek those symbols Which will explain ourselves to ourselves Evoke unlimited responses And prove that something called Canada Really exists in the hearts of all Handed out to every delegate At the start of proceedings A portfolio of documents On the cover of which appeared In gold letters not
A Mari Usque Ad Mare not Dieu Et Mon Droit not Je Me Souviens not E Pluribus Unum but
Limitations in life, artificial or otherwise, are very very real. Just because I can send an email to my VP doesn't make him make decisions any faster. Just because I can conference people from all over the world into my meetings doesn't make the meetings happen any faster.
With you encoding an MPEG-4 example, you are again making the assumption that because you are able to do something today that you were not able to do before, you are more productive. That is not always the case.
My argument is that just because something does more does not make it more productive. I'll have to resort to a car analogy. My car today can do a lot more than the car my parent's owned when I was growing up. It has power steering and ABS brakes. It has air conditioning. The radio can scan the airwaves automatically, looking for stations. Am I more comfortable in my car than in my parent's old car. Yes. Am I more productive? No. It still takes me the same amount of time to drive from point A to point B.
I am not dissing technology in general. It has greatly improved the quality of life of lots of people. And it does allow people to do a lot more stuff. But in my view a lot of that "more stuff" that you can do has nothing to do with productivity.
Slashdot Mirror
The next big one could come any time and kill us all. If it was really the end of the world would they let us know?
I sure that Slashdot would report it at least twice.
Most of us Canadians don't know the words anyway.
Reading that article makes me want to play Portal through again.
--sigh-- at least it won't take long.
I've come across, been subject to, and written many coding standards during my career and have come to the conclusion that coding standards are, for the most part, useless.
It is much better to let coders program to whatever style they are most comfortable with. Forcing specific bracing and indentation styles just leads to ill-will from most coders and creates a bureaucratic overhead that is more more trouble than it is worth. As long as the style is consistent within a single file, most programmers will have no trouble following it and have no trouble maintaining the code.
The only standard I think is worthwhile, when coding API libraries and such, is a naming standard. For example, a coder should not have to guess whether the method to get a property value is getProperty() or property_get() or propertyValueOf() or whatever. I don't care what the naming standard is, as long as it is consistent across the API.
I once had to do a software install on an ice-breaker. I had to fly out to the east coast, catch a twin-otter from a Canadian Forces base north to middle-of-nowhere-ville, then get flown by helicopter out to do an at sea landing on the ship.
After I arrived I discovered I had left one of the install discs on my desk at work.
I was confused because when I installed on my Windows box, when I first started Firefox it took me to the RC3 welcome page. When I checked the digital signature of the setup exe, it was dated June 11th.
So did RC3 become the final release, and they were just slow to change the welcome page?
I can just envision an Apple commercial for the switch
SC: I'm a smart car
SUV: And I'm an SUV
SC: You look a little thirsty, SUV.
SUV: I am. Ever since the price of gas went up, my owner started rationing my gas consumption.
SC: Aww, that's too bad, SUV.
SUV: Tell me about it. I mean, I was thirsty enough before. I could drink gas like there was no tomorrow.
SC: Well, SUV, if you kept drinking gas like that, there probably would be no tomorrow.
This book was published in October, 2007, and Rails 2.0 was released December, 2007. According to the description on Amazon, only the last example deals with 2.0 at all.
Since there were some rather significant changes introduced in Rails 2.0, it is likely that many of the examples will no longer work as described. I know that is the case with current version Agile Web Development with Rails.
And Doom 3 achieved this. It not only made me jump, it is one of the few games that gave me the creeps and made my skin crawl.
But it went on too long, and got boring. If Doom 3 were about 2/3 the length it was, then it would have been much better.
ACC's contribution was the idea of geostation *communication* satellites, not geostationary orbit.
So some scientists managed to decipher and playback a recording of some singing that was encoded 150 years ago. That sounds like a violation of the DMCA anti-circumvention provisions! They'll be getting a letter from the RIAA soon.
Arthur C. Clarke was one of the biggest inspirations of my life. It was his book Fountains of Paradise that inspired me to study engineering in University, which led me to where I am today.
I once wrote him to tell him that. He was kind enough to write back, saying he was thrilled to be an inspiration to the younger generations.
Farewell, ACC.
This article appears to be taking a stupid slant on the statistics that have been gathered. It keeps harping about the "Millenials" (people born after 1980) when really it should say "people in their 20s". My issue is that 20 years from now, the Millenials will be in their 40s, but it will still be the people in their 20s who are the greater risk. The Millenials are not a generation of risk takers, they are currently at the risk taking age.
When I was in my 20s, I was much more risk prone than I am now (in my 40s). Back then I considered it my *right* to be able to install whatever I wanted on a computer, and would be unconditionally annoyed and offended if it was not allowed. Today I am more aware that there are reasons for most restrictions. Yes, some restrictions don't make sense, but a very many do.
This type of thinking was in more aspects of life than just computers. Back in my 20s, I would say that I drove less cautiously than I do today. I drank more heavily, ate poorly, resented having to wear a bike helmet, jay-walked more often, the list goes on. These are all behaviours that I, and most people, grow out of.
Happy 13,730,000,000 billionth Universe!
Sorry I didn't get you anything.
Is sending a cease and desist letter going to help at all? Not one bit
This "hack" is out there. All they are doing is attempting to close the barn doors after the horses are all gone, and apparently making the "secret" URL even more public.
DKIM is designed to not require a root of trust for its certificates. Most DKIM installations simply use a free RSA private/public key pair generated using openssl. The private key goes on the SMTP server, and signs all the outgoing messages. The public key is placed on the DNS server servicing the domain. When a DKIM signed message is received, the receiving MTA retrieves the public key via DNS and verifies the signature.
If the signature verifies successfully, all you have proved is that the messages originated from the domain it claims to be from. This does not eliminate spam, since it is possible for iamaspammer.com to DKIM sign emails (DKIM is dead easy to implement), but it does go a long way to preventing a phisher from faking an email from ebay.com or whatever.
Some of the points made in this article are good, but a couple are way off the mark.
He lists as a negative indicator *anyone* who considers programming as a "day job." I know quite a few programmers who consider programming a day job. They come into work at 9, they work for 8 hours, they go home at 5, and then they do something entirely different. But the code that they produce while at work is brilliant. They are extremely bright people who enjoy programming, but don't live and breath it. They would rather do something else while not at work.
He lists as a positive indicator *anyone* who is passionate about technology. Sorry, but I've met a lot of people who are bubbling over with enthusiasm about programming, but can't code worth shit. These are the people dive headfirst into a programming job without any thought of design or architecture, and you end up with an application that uses half a dozen bleeding edge technologies, all bundled together with virtual duct tape, that disintegrates at the first input exception.
Something like this? :-)
Portal is the most finely crafted game I have played in a very long time. I don't think I've played such a good game since my Commodore 64 (M.U.L.E. probably). Sure, I've played lots of fun and engrossing games, but Portal was perfect from beginning to end.
Rang true then, rings true today.
Limitations in life, artificial or otherwise, are very very real. Just because I can send an email to my VP doesn't make him make decisions any faster. Just because I can conference people from all over the world into my meetings doesn't make the meetings happen any faster.
With you encoding an MPEG-4 example, you are again making the assumption that because you are able to do something today that you were not able to do before, you are more productive. That is not always the case.
My argument is that just because something does more does not make it more productive. I'll have to resort to a car analogy. My car today can do a lot more than the car my parent's owned when I was growing up. It has power steering and ABS brakes. It has air conditioning. The radio can scan the airwaves automatically, looking for stations. Am I more comfortable in my car than in my parent's old car. Yes. Am I more productive? No. It still takes me the same amount of time to drive from point A to point B.
I am not dissing technology in general. It has greatly improved the quality of life of lots of people. And it does allow people to do a lot more stuff. But in my view a lot of that "more stuff" that you can do has nothing to do with productivity.