As someone who needs to toss ideas over the wall, and worked in my last position for and in the same office with my colleague who was the deep thinker, I can completely agree with you. I figured it out right quick so it worked swimmingly, but if I hadn't already been thinking about these things I might have not noticed and just drove him nuts. I got it and researched quietly or coded to blaring music in my headphones when in the office, and would go out to another senior's cube who was like me and pair program with him when I knew there were unknowns I would want to talk over just to think through.
That said you're dead wrong. Megacorps waste WAYYY more developer time combined than anyone else with one simple thing; bullcrap bureaucracy stopping them from even assigning work. I've had months on end with zero assigned work at these places, and only been one of many at them effectively being told to wait on hold because the management layers above are trying to digest out some requirements for functionality they want but are 100% incapable leaving the only available work to the tier 3 guys that do custom professional services type triage work. This is an endemic problem in megacorps and because of the size of their dev teams they have effectively on hold, blows way more time in industry than all other possible time-wasters combined.
You're comment about seasoned programmers ignores the countless engineers who spent 10 years in industry only aware of the first rule. The poor sad sods.
Agreed. I find new guys appreciate me for my insights and skills. Maybe the OP's code sucks. Also could be due to my mentoring skills, perhaps the OP has zero skill in mentoring juniors in such a way that they learn positive perception towards code he previously thought poor. Unlikely though, my money's on the OP's code being poor quality, and him spending most his time defending it as the way it was done for good reason even though he can't articulate that reason because it was actually done poorly for no good reason.
I wish for this so much, but a single-payer healthcare system is the absolute only way I could ever accomplish such. My wife and child suffer from a disease, therefore I am required to live a salaried life with group-rate health-insurance. If it weren't for this I would be freelancing so that I could start my company on the side, I have a product idea I've been working on for a couple years with proof it would be great. Unfortunately the group-rate insurance is the only way I wouldn't be bankrupted. Isn't lobbyist-exploiting-capitalism fun!
I wonder how many others are out there like me who would gladly take a business loan, hire people, and benefit the economy if a disability outside of the control of ourselves (just like the pre-60s disability known as being black or hispanic, something one cannot control that takes their rights away) were not there. Praise be to the health insurance lobby.
You just stated the benefit in and of itself as the only solution. "unless the salary is structured and/or standardized, it wrecks morale." Yes. Perfect. That is precisely why in other countries it is common for people to talk about it, if the company tries to screw some of it's employees they'll find out the company is not instituting a standard and fair pay structure, therefore the company ends up being forced to do so which means people are paid fairly. You don't have one dude making twice what everyone else does just because he negotiated better, in negotiations he's told simply to go blow because they aren't going to pay him twice what others are paid who do the same work, and further they aren't going to offer someone half what everyone else is making because they think they can get away with it.
This increases competition too because people throughout the industry know what people are making around other companies, so if one company tries to offer half what other companies are paying, they won't be able to hire people, and effectively companies have to compete for talent. What an idea! Forcing companies to compete for us rather than against us! Considering we're the majority (the workers, actually doing the productive work for our GDP and collective countries value) and they're the minority, I think what benefits us is better than that which benefits them. Granted if it becomes unbalanced benefiting us as too much of their expense it's no longer good for us because it harms them, but as it stands with the ridiculous profits of corporations these days, they would have to dig *REALLY* deep to see any harm that would start negatively affecting employees (employees n. : the citizenry of the nation).
Thing is, the system where everyone just saves and pays for their medical needs themselves is the system where the disabled like my wife and child are effectively pushed into poverty because their medical needs are so much more significant in cost than they could ever pay for. You speak up for a system that effectively sacrifices the disabled to ensure the healthy like you have lower costs. In reality if everyone shared the burden in a single payer system it would be normalized so much amongst the healthy payers and unhealthy that you healthy folks would have a marginal increase in cost while those less fortunate would have a *significant* decrease.
The current system is analogous to a regressive tax where those doing the best pay the least and those with the most problems are punished for it, only it's worse than a tax because we're talking about health issues that aren't in the control of people often times.
By the way, you enjoy your HSA where you sock away money for your health problems. If you ever accidentally break an arm or get stabbed by a mugger though, unless you sir make tons of money, you cannot in any way afford the bills you will get outright, you'll join the monthly medical debt payers like me and a vast number of others. Until you've seen a $1million dollar medical bill that was in no way anyone's fault but you're on the hook for, you really have no right speaking up for how good or bad the healthcare system is structured in this country.
If you get that $1M medical bill and still think this countries healthcare is structured well then that's fine you at least have experienced the medical system and have a leg to stand on, but if you have very little experience using medical services in this country which is clearly the case, then you have no leg to stand on with your analysis.
And before you say "well that's not a problem when high deductible insurance covers those major events" let me just say you're ignoring the countless follow-up visits necessary to properly care for someone who's had any major medical event seeing a variety of specialists which aren't "catastrophic events" and therefore are not-covered by your insurance.
Specifically the platforms. The boom in mobile devices all having varied hardware requires C glue for each one to let the managed stuff run. The mobile boom has ironically been a new hardware boom causing an old software boom.
I basically agree here though I still fail to keep my mouth shut. One trick I've learned to not make this problematic is A) hold myself to the same standard; which means publically defame my own work so nobody thinks I'm giving them guff because I know better, and B) hold *all* people equally to that standard, and when they meet it give high praise, do whats in your power to help them (I have actively requested the people be brought into projects they wanted to be on, or generally backed them with my reputation wherever possible when they meet those standards). Result: People know I'm opinionated and in a couple offices this was problematic no lie, in others this was beneficial because managers and other engineers would actively seek me out for my opinions and advice on technical issues, plus engineers liked working with me because they knew if they put the effort in and did well people would hear about it. Basically I'm a loud mouth and that can be good and bad, but if you don't have your mouth indeterminably and unfilteredly attached to your brain, go with what the poster above me suggests. Some of us just aren't so capable.
One problem: Why do you think we even care about going into space or to another planet? Resources. A space base uses resources from earth to be built and maintained while generating 0 value (other than scientific of course). However a terraformed planet-space would involve the availability of resources which are either in short-supply on earth, or possibly ones that don't even exist here.
As someone with one child who wishes he could have another, that whole "My dog is my child" thing effing creeps me out. Seriously, that is jacked. Perhaps you're right, the type of folks who are emotionally lost enough to attribute their dog as their child would also be happy to attribute it to a robot... Though for the rest of us, the uncanny valley is a trainwreck.
Seriously, where did these guys get this idea in their head? Do they honestly believe what they're saying or are they just fooling with people saying these things with the eventual goal of really screwing with people when they actually create the thing. I mean, if I could do it, I would too, just to mess with people. But I would have no allusions that it would be beneficial in the least towards the ends they're talking about.
Yeah, because that wouldn't make money completely without value at all! Money only has a value so long as it's hard to get. As soon as large quantities of money become common place so do the prices rise, standard inflation rules apply here. In the creation of a robot driven economy the real question is how do we avoid inflation? Sadly a povertyless economy is impossible, the best state of an economy is a standard distribution (I don't know how that distribution should occur though I'm guessing something like a curve with highest titration in the middle).
It goes back to why no one works in communism, why bother when you don't have to? The answer quickly becomes, because the government will make you since technically the country needs you to or else even with a robot economy things will fall apart with no one working. Though when the government commands people to work things get complicated fast. This is a complex issue, and one I'm glad (or sincerely hope) I will not live to see.
I frankly have no idea how such an economy would play out. But you are vastly oversimplifying it.
I don't say this about many things being the progressive technologist that I am, but this case really seriously calls for it: DO NOT FIX WHAT'S NOT BROKEN
Just saying, when it comes to managing out nuclear weapons, what we have right now seems to be working just fine, so please please just leave it the hell alone!!
That said, I trust the military in this particular case over the civilian portion of the government. One thing about the military portion of the government is for all the DoD contractors there are (and I don't think that's who has anything to do with this stuff to be sure, I'm pretty damn certain it is the Airforce/Navy directly maintaining the knowledge and responsibility for this stuff in the ranks), the military side has stringent rules it will hold private entities that it contracts to regarding exposure to foreign entities, those same rules are not so in place on the civilian side of the government's contracting management arms.
Which is why thank the lords some languages have grown common standards that are fairly industry wide, that's probably the thing I love about C# more than anything else, I can wander GitHub from one project to another from one author to another with no relation between them and I never have to decipher somebody's layout or the intention of their style because it's 98% identical.
This thing already has been created to follow soldiers and carry 400lbs, how much tweaking does it take to attach a camera with wifi and a gun to this thing, then all the dude with the joystick has to do is click on the enemy from the camera and it already knows how to chase that person firing at him. Fun animal-like robot is just the cover story, the real story here is a prototype for an unmanned land-drone. The air-drones are capable of following a target on their own, this thing already has that ability built in, not much longer now before the curtain is dropped and footage of this thing chasing someone through a market firing at him appears.
To further my point, a mule? Why are they even bothering to say this? Well frankly, if DARPA went out saying they were creating an unmanned mechanized death machine which has cameras and software that causes it to follow (read: chase) people through the woods people would flip out. Donkeys carrying water following the troops are a much nicer image than spider-bot carrying gun chasing enemies through a cave.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been on those projects where management couldn't make up their minds so they just kept me on hold until they did. That's how I found Slashdot.
As someone who needs to toss ideas over the wall, and worked in my last position for and in the same office with my colleague who was the deep thinker, I can completely agree with you. I figured it out right quick so it worked swimmingly, but if I hadn't already been thinking about these things I might have not noticed and just drove him nuts. I got it and researched quietly or coded to blaring music in my headphones when in the office, and would go out to another senior's cube who was like me and pair program with him when I knew there were unknowns I would want to talk over just to think through.
That said you're dead wrong. Megacorps waste WAYYY more developer time combined than anyone else with one simple thing; bullcrap bureaucracy stopping them from even assigning work. I've had months on end with zero assigned work at these places, and only been one of many at them effectively being told to wait on hold because the management layers above are trying to digest out some requirements for functionality they want but are 100% incapable leaving the only available work to the tier 3 guys that do custom professional services type triage work. This is an endemic problem in megacorps and because of the size of their dev teams they have effectively on hold, blows way more time in industry than all other possible time-wasters combined.
I work there now. Can I join you? PLEASE???
Less effective than advertised.
You're comment about seasoned programmers ignores the countless engineers who spent 10 years in industry only aware of the first rule. The poor sad sods.
Agreed. I find new guys appreciate me for my insights and skills. Maybe the OP's code sucks. Also could be due to my mentoring skills, perhaps the OP has zero skill in mentoring juniors in such a way that they learn positive perception towards code he previously thought poor. Unlikely though, my money's on the OP's code being poor quality, and him spending most his time defending it as the way it was done for good reason even though he can't articulate that reason because it was actually done poorly for no good reason.
I wish for this so much, but a single-payer healthcare system is the absolute only way I could ever accomplish such. My wife and child suffer from a disease, therefore I am required to live a salaried life with group-rate health-insurance. If it weren't for this I would be freelancing so that I could start my company on the side, I have a product idea I've been working on for a couple years with proof it would be great. Unfortunately the group-rate insurance is the only way I wouldn't be bankrupted. Isn't lobbyist-exploiting-capitalism fun!
I wonder how many others are out there like me who would gladly take a business loan, hire people, and benefit the economy if a disability outside of the control of ourselves (just like the pre-60s disability known as being black or hispanic, something one cannot control that takes their rights away) were not there. Praise be to the health insurance lobby.
You just stated the benefit in and of itself as the only solution. "unless the salary is structured and/or standardized, it wrecks morale." Yes. Perfect. That is precisely why in other countries it is common for people to talk about it, if the company tries to screw some of it's employees they'll find out the company is not instituting a standard and fair pay structure, therefore the company ends up being forced to do so which means people are paid fairly. You don't have one dude making twice what everyone else does just because he negotiated better, in negotiations he's told simply to go blow because they aren't going to pay him twice what others are paid who do the same work, and further they aren't going to offer someone half what everyone else is making because they think they can get away with it.
This increases competition too because people throughout the industry know what people are making around other companies, so if one company tries to offer half what other companies are paying, they won't be able to hire people, and effectively companies have to compete for talent. What an idea! Forcing companies to compete for us rather than against us! Considering we're the majority (the workers, actually doing the productive work for our GDP and collective countries value) and they're the minority, I think what benefits us is better than that which benefits them. Granted if it becomes unbalanced benefiting us as too much of their expense it's no longer good for us because it harms them, but as it stands with the ridiculous profits of corporations these days, they would have to dig *REALLY* deep to see any harm that would start negatively affecting employees (employees n. : the citizenry of the nation).
Thing is, the system where everyone just saves and pays for their medical needs themselves is the system where the disabled like my wife and child are effectively pushed into poverty because their medical needs are so much more significant in cost than they could ever pay for. You speak up for a system that effectively sacrifices the disabled to ensure the healthy like you have lower costs. In reality if everyone shared the burden in a single payer system it would be normalized so much amongst the healthy payers and unhealthy that you healthy folks would have a marginal increase in cost while those less fortunate would have a *significant* decrease.
The current system is analogous to a regressive tax where those doing the best pay the least and those with the most problems are punished for it, only it's worse than a tax because we're talking about health issues that aren't in the control of people often times.
By the way, you enjoy your HSA where you sock away money for your health problems. If you ever accidentally break an arm or get stabbed by a mugger though, unless you sir make tons of money, you cannot in any way afford the bills you will get outright, you'll join the monthly medical debt payers like me and a vast number of others. Until you've seen a $1million dollar medical bill that was in no way anyone's fault but you're on the hook for, you really have no right speaking up for how good or bad the healthcare system is structured in this country.
If you get that $1M medical bill and still think this countries healthcare is structured well then that's fine you at least have experienced the medical system and have a leg to stand on, but if you have very little experience using medical services in this country which is clearly the case, then you have no leg to stand on with your analysis.
And before you say "well that's not a problem when high deductible insurance covers those major events" let me just say you're ignoring the countless follow-up visits necessary to properly care for someone who's had any major medical event seeing a variety of specialists which aren't "catastrophic events" and therefore are not-covered by your insurance.
AWESOME!
All that lead in your brain you just don't remember any of it, ya danged violent offender.
Specifically the platforms. The boom in mobile devices all having varied hardware requires C glue for each one to let the managed stuff run. The mobile boom has ironically been a new hardware boom causing an old software boom.
That is absolutely hilarious. Would that I knew how to use the moderation system, I would +something.
I basically agree here though I still fail to keep my mouth shut. One trick I've learned to not make this problematic is A) hold myself to the same standard; which means publically defame my own work so nobody thinks I'm giving them guff because I know better, and B) hold *all* people equally to that standard, and when they meet it give high praise, do whats in your power to help them (I have actively requested the people be brought into projects they wanted to be on, or generally backed them with my reputation wherever possible when they meet those standards). Result: People know I'm opinionated and in a couple offices this was problematic no lie, in others this was beneficial because managers and other engineers would actively seek me out for my opinions and advice on technical issues, plus engineers liked working with me because they knew if they put the effort in and did well people would hear about it. Basically I'm a loud mouth and that can be good and bad, but if you don't have your mouth indeterminably and unfilteredly attached to your brain, go with what the poster above me suggests. Some of us just aren't so capable.
Of course they don't, corporations pass them.
Not to mention Somolia.
One problem: Why do you think we even care about going into space or to another planet? Resources. A space base uses resources from earth to be built and maintained while generating 0 value (other than scientific of course). However a terraformed planet-space would involve the availability of resources which are either in short-supply on earth, or possibly ones that don't even exist here.
As someone with one child who wishes he could have another, that whole "My dog is my child" thing effing creeps me out. Seriously, that is jacked. Perhaps you're right, the type of folks who are emotionally lost enough to attribute their dog as their child would also be happy to attribute it to a robot... Though for the rest of us, the uncanny valley is a trainwreck.
Seriously, where did these guys get this idea in their head? Do they honestly believe what they're saying or are they just fooling with people saying these things with the eventual goal of really screwing with people when they actually create the thing. I mean, if I could do it, I would too, just to mess with people. But I would have no allusions that it would be beneficial in the least towards the ends they're talking about.
Yeah, because that wouldn't make money completely without value at all! Money only has a value so long as it's hard to get. As soon as large quantities of money become common place so do the prices rise, standard inflation rules apply here. In the creation of a robot driven economy the real question is how do we avoid inflation? Sadly a povertyless economy is impossible, the best state of an economy is a standard distribution (I don't know how that distribution should occur though I'm guessing something like a curve with highest titration in the middle).
It goes back to why no one works in communism, why bother when you don't have to? The answer quickly becomes, because the government will make you since technically the country needs you to or else even with a robot economy things will fall apart with no one working. Though when the government commands people to work things get complicated fast. This is a complex issue, and one I'm glad (or sincerely hope) I will not live to see.
I frankly have no idea how such an economy would play out. But you are vastly oversimplifying it.
I don't say this about many things being the progressive technologist that I am, but this case really seriously calls for it:
DO NOT FIX WHAT'S NOT BROKEN
Just saying, when it comes to managing out nuclear weapons, what we have right now seems to be working just fine, so please please just leave it the hell alone!!
That said, I trust the military in this particular case over the civilian portion of the government. One thing about the military portion of the government is for all the DoD contractors there are (and I don't think that's who has anything to do with this stuff to be sure, I'm pretty damn certain it is the Airforce/Navy directly maintaining the knowledge and responsibility for this stuff in the ranks), the military side has stringent rules it will hold private entities that it contracts to regarding exposure to foreign entities, those same rules are not so in place on the civilian side of the government's contracting management arms.
Which is why thank the lords some languages have grown common standards that are fairly industry wide, that's probably the thing I love about C# more than anything else, I can wander GitHub from one project to another from one author to another with no relation between them and I never have to decipher somebody's layout or the intention of their style because it's 98% identical.
handless toothless zombies are funny. They just stump and maw at you. Why has this character not been in any movies yet??
This thing already has been created to follow soldiers and carry 400lbs, how much tweaking does it take to attach a camera with wifi and a gun to this thing, then all the dude with the joystick has to do is click on the enemy from the camera and it already knows how to chase that person firing at him. Fun animal-like robot is just the cover story, the real story here is a prototype for an unmanned land-drone. The air-drones are capable of following a target on their own, this thing already has that ability built in, not much longer now before the curtain is dropped and footage of this thing chasing someone through a market firing at him appears.
To further my point, a mule? Why are they even bothering to say this? Well frankly, if DARPA went out saying they were creating an unmanned mechanized death machine which has cameras and software that causes it to follow (read: chase) people through the woods people would flip out. Donkeys carrying water following the troops are a much nicer image than spider-bot carrying gun chasing enemies through a cave.