Mostly public safety and mobile workforce. This approach only works (well?) when you control both ends (applications and/or comm. stack and/or proxies obviously). It has its weaknesses, especially very large messages (fragmentation and bundling optimization, default buffer sizes on network) or if used too aggressively - would need more research and design but mostly works well. Actually started because we needed reliable roaming communications over different types of networks - private (X.25, Motorola, Ericsson, etc) as well as CDPD, satellites and WiFi/cellular to mobile devices. There are some other benefits on authentication, en/decryption and application routing levels also which need a certain lengths guaranteed.
Hi Anonymous, why Anonymous? Yes - you are right, TCP, UDP, or any other transport layer management doesn't solve the Internet problems. They all are IP or even if you want to go lower, Ethernet. This problem is not new - it has always been there whatever protocol you use, it really is an economical or business problem, not a technical one.
Yes, a very good point. I have designed network systems which, even they still look like TCP for applications, are actually using UDP - TCP was too inefficient over any wireless routed through public networks. We just couldn't get a steady flow when number of the users did go over 10K. There comes other benefits as message bundling, chaining, etc but they could be done in TCP if the system wouldn't have to wait some arbitrary timeout or ack for an window. People seem to forget that TCP is a transport protocol so all these tricks should really have no effect but how protocols are today - they do!
They did but networks were still thought to be a (relatively) slow medium. Many other reasons probably because this behavior was already known on hardware channels, buses, pipelines, etc but was not seen a real problem in network. TCP especially because it is seen as a "streaming" protocol instead of using datagrams, messages, blocks, whatever when in reality on lover level it isn't that (except when you have the pleasure to use IP traffic over old comm. protocols, modems, UARTs, etc) Back to subject, I also don't think that the proposed way dropping packets would work, at least not for long. The network speeds are increasing and any pacing, throttling, whatever should really be based on real delivery - not on arbitrary timeouts or polling. Both have been proven to real problematic when talking fast delivery, on long end eat (much) more resources and the trashing, pulsing, etc come difficult.
Correct! I have to say I'm not amazed. We did the same kind of ratings a long time ago, guess where - right, in insurance. Part of the risk management. Is a red headed under 30 less risk than a blond at the same age? Better - what and how costly will be their next accident. Trying to predict human behavior, the cause and the results has been there a long time. The same was done for example ships world wide we insured but there wasn't just the information of the shipping company, we did background checking and information collection of the captain, the crew, companies using/shipping the goods, etc, the more information, the more accurate the risk estimates. To the topic, the more information you get, external or internal, the better the estimate, proven in my mind (and in your insurance rates.) Now - this creates an interesting dilemma, how much information you can get and how much information collection the targets will tolerate? Another subject!
Absolutely correct - ((C++ says)) I don't leak, you leak! If the programmer can't keep track of the memory, it is time to get more experience (or forget the programming!) No programming language with GC can fix what you don't know or understand. Sorry - just fixed a horrible C# system slowly running out of the memory and not even talking how the "perfect" thread pools were used!
Same here, since -67. Actually I think no language is really "bad" but how and where they are used is totally gone weird! C, not C++ or C#, is simple but only if you know what you are doing. Same could be said of many languages but the scope of knowledge is different. Take Simula, the first object language, very easy to write if you know what you want - C++ doesn't get even near to that (it isn't even an object oriented language in pure sense), you depend of language syntax instead trying to address the problem to solve. And I'm not a Cobol programmer but to solve a business problem where the calculations have to be correct, different from scientific problems, I would say Cobol is your language. And it is not wordy (where that came?) - with good copy libraries (not mixed with object libraries!) it comes very clean and short to write (and read.) Funny you mention list languages - for example LISP can be very powerful, one of the few languages which can bootstrap itself and endlessly expandable. In right hands it really is one of the most powerful of languages - just takes a little to get to the mindset, as do APL, Prolog, Erlang, etc. Now, showing my age, IBM BAL (basic assembly language) is still my favorite - all the benefits, easy to write, you are in control what and how, very clean and short (if you know what you are doing), commenting is easy, as efficient as any language can get, can interface any other languages and libraries, native threading (tasking) since when, and so on. I wouldn't use it for scientific or for some business tasks but when you need control and performance. Fortran - another undervalued language (as PL/I but let's forget it) - if you need scientific calculations based on tested and proven routines, then it is your language. There has been a long time conversions to C++ for libraries but the amount of code (with weird syntax, nothing to do with calculation itself) will be many times what is needed writing the same code in Fortran - weird again. And it is very easy to read and comment. All these languages have compilers to almost any platform so porting is easy, they report the accurate warning/error positions and don't give up in first error (my gripe with C - the real problem may be 1000 lines back in some include file defined third time over but try to find it sometimes!) Yes, I agree with many of the comments, it is important today to know C++, Java, C#, scripting languages (REXX is my favorite - Python is great, AWK has it's place, Tk/Tcl, PERL, PHP, JavaScript, VBS, etc each have their use) but this only because the business selects languages by whoever screams loudest, not what is most suitable for the problem in hand. Maybe the focus is too much on languages instead of the solutions? Languages are (relatively) easy. If they are used in business I would assume that company has a CM/SC and well tested libraries in place already so any standard and routine will work independent of the language or platform. In new development I would recommend starting from that, build standard, language independent, well tested code and object libraries first. That is the way what I have seen business working a long, long time - maybe that's why Cobol doesn't go away, it just works on whatever you throw against it, no new, fancy coding needed - maybe call your new XML parser instead of your old parser or change the runtime library reference but that's just one liner. And move it from 32 to 64 bit or from Intel to IBM G6 just by compiling and it still works. Try that in C++ especially with floating point (not defined yet) or endian changes or xxP64 standards or whatever - good luck!
A good advice, there is a huge difference between JOB and being good in programming (whatever that means?) Much easier, as many have already said, learn the languages (the syntax) and the libraries (APIs, objects, whatever) used in application programming, that's what most of the companies are looking. The hard way - learn(!) the languages so you know how they are constructed, how they are different in different platforms and why (a wide field), etc. Very few companies and positions for that so an University is a good advice in that case. Then you (but don't count the companies) learn that languages are just tools to make the computers work. Just be careful if you learn too much - after 20+ years coding in C on all kinds of system (8-64bit, small/big endian, with/without stack protection, controllers to mainframes, etc) I blew up a contract when asked how I would implement "atoi" if it didn't exist and I was stupid enough to ask on what platform! End of conversation - can't say that I'm sorry but it kind of describes the differences between application coding and knowing your language.
Maybe funny but look at the investments of some large Indian companies (no names.) Some are heavily investing or at least interested to invest for support centers in US. Computing is getting more and more global but, I have to say, Indians are fast learning where they can find not so expensive support. Good and bad, depends on how you look it.
"Amazing the number of "ignorance is bliss" responses on this thread. What you don't know is not allowed to hurt you. Wish I lived in that world." - me too! But maybe some live in a very small world (their own?) and maybe I don't want any part of that? Seriously, ORDB (a free service) did more than most, some just cut the service but they announced it a long time ago. If the administrators are too lazy (or worse) to handle their side - what can you say? Now - to the comments of the unmanaged mail services, ouch!! Why and who would do that? It really is asking trouble! Now - I still don't get black/block lists managed by some, even commercial, company? Everyone has a bias and at least I have been hit with filters which were based on, not spamming or such, an administrators view of the world, just because someone didn't like what was in that IP address or range. Almost did cost our company a huge contract! In todays technology and fast computers, for a good advice see acme : http://acme.com/mail_filtering/sendmail_config_frameset.html/ , there are some good advices and don't let the date of the site fool you.
Yes, very obvious. Drop modifying URL ( or any other mechanism to identify ) - it has been obvious a long, long time. Drop modifying DNS ( or any other mechanism to identify source and/or origin ) - obvious a long, long time ago. And so on. Does anyone remember when ordering cars or car parts using a computer in 80's. Let's see - at least Toyota did that, I think Nissan and Volvo maybe at the same time. The requests got distributed depending of system, network and locality to a link to Japan, the country main location and if they had a local dealership with a system there also. So, this kind of processing is nothing new. Actually airlines used similar processing in a world wide network in 70's already. It wasn't for public but the mechanism was much the same except the systems were much more complicated because of the logistics. That the service is now offered by an external company should not be worth of a patent - they can copyright their code but patenting methods / algorithms? Weird because if we let acronym (URL, DNS, IP, SDLC, etc) usage and manipulation be patented it will be a wild west again.
I just hope that when you take your custom painted car to service you don't complain when other side of car is wiped clean. Or send your signed camera body for adjustment, signature is gone and the value did go down %80+! Or send an oil painting for frame fixing and instead of the original Van Gogh get back a painting from some local artist - it is an oil painting, even new and fresh!, what you are complaining. Or maybe an old photograph for restoration and they do so good job that clean all the text and names out of it - they definitely are not part of a photograph! And so on.. Actually all these are examples where the company doing the job had to pay, and most of time a lot because those can't get back. I also hope that you are not on the receiving end when telling a Harley Davidson guy that you just cleaned the paintings out of gas tank for extra service when fixing the valves.
First, Joels list :
1. Do you use source control?
2. Can you make a build in one step?
3. Do you make daily builds?
4. Do you have a bug database?
5. Do you fix bugs before writing new code?
6. Do you have an up-to-date schedule?
7. Do you have a spec?
8. Do programmers have quiet working conditions?
9. Do you use the best tools money can buy?
10. Do you have testers?
11. Do new candidates write code during their interview?
12. Do you do hallway usability testing?
has nothing to do with "superstar" programmer, it is just a rambling of common things mostly out of the control of any programmer. Superstar may be fast or may not, a mood point in lifetime a product. Superstar may or may not be a good corporate citizen, that is only to please the management. Superstar has opinions because he/she knows what he/she is talking. Superstar leads others, not that he/she wants but because what he/she is. Superstar listens even managers but makes his/hers own decisions. Superstar can be the worst programmer if forced to work against the best practices (he/she knows much better than any manager) or using the bad tools, etc especially when good ones are available. Superstar doesn't care what platform, language, operating system or business problem is - he/she gets the work done and teaches others aside. Superstar writes extensible and flexible systems that can run and be maintained "forever". And so on.. Now - (almost) all this goes against current management idea but sorry, you can't control a superstar, you can only give interesting problems to him/her to solve and if you want "good" results to support him/her. Superstars don't care of money BUT are very sensitive to that. Superstar can get bored or even agitated of the so common "carrots" as a corporate sign to your desk for work well done, etc. Superstars want to get out, they are actually very social and amazingly often very family oriented, so two, three seminars or development conferences a year will keep them more happy. NO - pony and dog shows will not do that, they hate those. A long list and you may ask what separates them from CEO's - they just haven't made up their mind to start own company!
Yes, Fire's, SupedDomes, clusters, distributed minis, even Google network and so on have their places in computing world but when it comes to my money, I hope it is run in a real mainframe. The difference is not just the raw power (more later) but the reliability. Tandem (HP NonStop) and Stratus get near but there still are small differences. Mainframes (IBM and IBM clones mainly, Univac/Unisys, Burroughs and Honeywell good second but mostly history today) are different, just different. IBM 360 (370/390/z whatever) may be old but still the only SIMPLE system which was created not by chance or comities but on sound engineering principles for usability, performance and reliability. Actually all you need is "Principles of Operation" (grown over years but still readable) and you can do whatever you want in that system. Nothing (not much anyway) hidden. There is no such document of any other system - DOS (heh!) used to have one but that's another story. Now, about performance. Simple systems can perform better in your PC than in a mainframe but when it comes to raw information (not just computational) performance nothing, not even Fire or SuperDome, can do the same. Combine that to almost unlimited recoverability on hardware, you get the picture. There is a price but the real ROI is much more than just the one time or even monthly hardware / software price.
"Actually, that's precisely what laws are for -- to protect the weak. The strong don't need protection. That's what the word "strong" means." Thank you - now I understand why there are all the laws protecting the ruling class of their decisions and actions! Back to topic - we have three grownup kids who have been in computers since they were able to use the keyboard. No problems but maybe it was because anything they didn't understand they did ask us. At teen, normal teens, sneaking out some nights, doing other things what teens do, etc but somehow always telling us later or sometimes even asking could they do this or that. Learned early on that two persons saying silly things may not hate each other but be the best friends who just happen to be fans of competing sport groups or whatever. Learned that words can be laughed (or cried) off but they can't hurt you. Actually never punished but often needed some long and fun talking. Why fun - brings back memories when you were at that age and did some equally stupid things. Yes - the responsibility is with parents but sometimes for one or another reason it just doesn't work. Nobody needs punishment but a little help might be in place. And people as the neighbor, I think people like that are already recognized what they are and in some societies they would have been told to change or to move on, no laws required. We all know some people like that but do we do anything for it is another story. A very old proverb "it takes a village to grow a child".
Should not but your reference is a little off in/. - remember "The Onion is not intended for readers under 18 years of age." There are some things here which should be screened out in./ as sarcasm, unions, economy, etc , they just don't work too well with unskilled and undeveloped personalities, and I don't mean auto workers.
Correct! There are many people who know how but when you compare it to the projects where Ruby (or Java, or..) is used what's the point. Headache and less pay. I'm not on level where microcode people (next level, more headache) are but have done my share low level coding (at the time when systems programmers were real) for anything from controllers and channel drivers to multi-processor memory managers and schedulers. Once you get it, you can code to any hardware. But who would like to do that with what is payed today - it's just coding, must be easy, no need to pay, no high return next quarter, etc. I still miss it, it is interesting, gives you a real picture how hardware works behind all these "high" level languages and libraries. Skills on that level are needed if you really want to know how any computer language works on any platform or why your multi-threading doesn't behave at is should or why you start getting protection failures when the cpu model changes or why some are never able to code for real-time systems. And this doesn't exclude high level languages - there have been OS's in COBOL, Algol, Lisp, PL/x etc which are not very low level languages but then you really have to know how they work. Lately I have coded some memory, queue, restart etc routines for PDA's and mobiles - not my job really but too few people in project, the normal story - and it was fun again. You just look the hardware, what and how, and it is not difficult.
Here in Seattle - come and smell the real coffee. But don't go to Starbucks, any corner has a better coffee shop and real cups. And who drinks coffee out of paper or plastic mug anyway?? This city is full of free wifi places, not much reason to pay. Maybe not as good as S.F. but getting there.
Re:To Original Ethics in IT Post
on
Ethics In IT
·
· Score: 1
"I do miss the good ol days though!!" - me too. I started in a big company where the old fashioned CEO pushed the code of ethics, inside and to the customers. Some of the competition did grow faster but also did go down down sooner or later, we just kept growing based on reputation. What happened later is sad, a new CEO, fortunately I had changed the company when I did see where it was going. Ethics is personal, either a person or a community. It is also always based on truth - it may sometimes hurt (or at least not get you a job or security clearance) but on long run it pays back. I think people are getting more aware of that. You are not any more asked if you support this or that in politics, whatever but do you believe same ethics as the group asking. A supple difference but it is there, one is blind faith, one is believing to same basic rules. Unfortunately in IT there still is this "good corporate citizen" mentality, close your eyes and you are told what and how to behave, forget anything else. You follow that and your job is secure, you can go up in ladders until you are the one telling the same. No problem as long as.. But be careful, sometimes corporate "ethics" don't match with current laws and regulations and if you are not yet on CxO level it may cost you a lot.
Excuse me - "extrememly sensitive information, including what everyone got paid" ?? What is the relation to ethics? Looking data ? What you would do with information can be ethical or not but what's the difference of CxO pay and an user e-mail, address, even name - it's just data to be processed? Maybe I don't get it? Or maybe I do - it is against corporate rules and they are the ultimate ethical code. Just don't ask me to build / test / fix any of those systems in such company, I only work on real data if you need correct results, fakes are cheaper. Sorry, just have had two systems built to imaginary data and assumptions and failing! And did I say, fixing those is more expensive, much!
For us./:ters - read this. http://www.oreillynet.com/wateringhole/blog/ - I'm not advertising but it is the most hilarious for anyone in software business! Really, I'm not a coder (any more) but this hits it!
A good answer and good replies, mostly. No Wiki or any of these $xxxxxx packages can solve your problems! One thing I found a long (very long) time ago is that you can't compromise in documentation. I would change that "you need support" statement to "you only need the support of CEO and top management." The rest is, if not technically but politically, easy. But, the technology is there, frameworks and standards give a guidelines what and how, a lot depends how it is implemented. And today it is mostly IT, not much handwritten papers except signing them by your handwriting. Back to./ users - it really is beneficial to all (of us) if the documentation is up to date. Anyone argues? But it goes much further than making our lives easier, it is a business necessity! IMHO the whole documentation problem is gone wrong - all vendors have different systems, methods and ignorant managers are buying one package after another without any idea what is the goal of documentation. Something has and will happen to documentation, again, because of the rules, regulations, laws, etc and because it really is one area in business where they can save a lot and be competitive. Don't hold your breath with current management!
It really is hilarious when I do see MS complaining IBM masterminding something like that. Must be a desperate manager somewhere in MS hierarchy! MS is business and, don't flame me, I really think they were better with BG on top. Now, I see more and more this kind of things coming out. Something is going is MS, they really are implementing more Open Source to their systems, they are buying or hiring more from Open Source, but keeping it very tight. I just hope they will follow the copyright laws they are so fond! MS has a lot of bright people but management sometimes doesn't give that impression. IBM is capable of any trick, they have shown that over years, but why would open standards be bad? Maybe for one company the proprietary methods and protocols are beneficial but what about the rest of the world? Just a stupid question, money, of course!
Yes, they should! But, unfortunately, no such paragraph in law books. Some countries do have that but it is against a capitalist system so you will not see it here. It has good and bad points, sometimes(?) the courts might just be biased and where you are then? But there should be some balances, I even think you should be able to sue politicians of their (paid?) decisions which are proved wrong later on - isn't that what democracy is? Or maybe a republic is not really a democracy?
Right! One talented musician I know got a lot of offers from music companies. Fortunately he was clever enough to take the offers to an lawyer. The advice was, by the way the math in parent is right, if you sell xx millions you still own the company. Now, if you sell xx millions more, you can make some money. Because he is he, not she who can be sold by looks, he refused. Plays wonderful music today which, unfortunately because of the system, very few can get. IMHO the system is weird but on the other hand, it is really a perfect picture of system where you do the work and someone else get the benefits. I leave to readers imagination what that system is?
Slashdot Mirror
Mostly public safety and mobile workforce. This approach only works (well?) when you control both ends (applications and/or comm. stack and/or proxies obviously). It has its weaknesses, especially very large messages (fragmentation and bundling optimization, default buffer sizes on network) or if used too aggressively - would need more research and design but mostly works well. Actually started because we needed reliable roaming communications over different types of networks - private (X.25, Motorola, Ericsson, etc) as well as CDPD, satellites and WiFi/cellular to mobile devices. There are some other benefits on authentication, en/decryption and application routing levels also which need a certain lengths guaranteed.
Hi Anonymous, why Anonymous? Yes - you are right, TCP, UDP, or any other transport layer management doesn't solve the Internet problems. They all are IP or even if you want to go lower, Ethernet. This problem is not new - it has always been there whatever protocol you use, it really is an economical or business problem, not a technical one.
Yes, a very good point. I have designed network systems which, even they still look like TCP for applications, are actually using UDP - TCP was too inefficient over any wireless routed through public networks. We just couldn't get a steady flow when number of the users did go over 10K. There comes other benefits as message bundling, chaining, etc but they could be done in TCP if the system wouldn't have to wait some arbitrary timeout or ack for an window. People seem to forget that TCP is a transport protocol so all these tricks should really have no effect but how protocols are today - they do!
They did but networks were still thought to be a (relatively) slow medium. Many other reasons probably because this behavior was already known on hardware channels, buses, pipelines, etc but was not seen a real problem in network. TCP especially because it is seen as a "streaming" protocol instead of using datagrams, messages, blocks, whatever when in reality on lover level it isn't that (except when you have the pleasure to use IP traffic over old comm. protocols, modems, UARTs, etc)
Back to subject, I also don't think that the proposed way dropping packets would work, at least not for long. The network speeds are increasing and any pacing, throttling, whatever should really be based on real delivery - not on arbitrary timeouts or polling. Both have been proven to real problematic when talking fast delivery, on long end eat (much) more resources and the trashing, pulsing, etc come difficult.
Correct! I have to say I'm not amazed. We did the same kind of ratings a long time ago, guess where - right, in insurance. Part of the risk management. Is a red headed under 30 less risk than a blond at the same age? Better - what and how costly will be their next accident. Trying to predict human behavior, the cause and the results has been there a long time. The same was done for example ships world wide we insured but there wasn't just the information of the shipping company, we did background checking and information collection of the captain, the crew, companies using/shipping the goods, etc, the more information, the more accurate the risk estimates.
To the topic, the more information you get, external or internal, the better the estimate, proven in my mind (and in your insurance rates.)
Now - this creates an interesting dilemma, how much information you can get and how much information collection the targets will tolerate? Another subject!
Absolutely correct - ((C++ says)) I don't leak, you leak! If the programmer can't keep track of the memory, it is time to get more experience (or forget the programming!) No programming language with GC can fix what you don't know or understand. Sorry - just fixed a horrible C# system slowly running out of the memory and not even talking how the "perfect" thread pools were used!
Same here, since -67. Actually I think no language is really "bad" but how and where they are used is totally gone weird! C, not C++ or C#, is simple but only if you know what you are doing. Same could be said of many languages but the scope of knowledge is different. Take Simula, the first object language, very easy to write if you know what you want - C++ doesn't get even near to that (it isn't even an object oriented language in pure sense), you depend of language syntax instead trying to address the problem to solve. And I'm not a Cobol programmer but to solve a business problem where the calculations have to be correct, different from scientific problems, I would say Cobol is your language. And it is not wordy (where that came?) - with good copy libraries (not mixed with object libraries!) it comes very clean and short to write (and read.) Funny you mention list languages - for example LISP can be very powerful, one of the few languages which can bootstrap itself and endlessly expandable. In right hands it really is one of the most powerful of languages - just takes a little to get to the mindset, as do APL, Prolog, Erlang, etc. Now, showing my age, IBM BAL (basic assembly language) is still my favorite - all the benefits, easy to write, you are in control what and how, very clean and short (if you know what you are doing), commenting is easy, as efficient as any language can get, can interface any other languages and libraries, native threading (tasking) since when, and so on. I wouldn't use it for scientific or for some business tasks but when you need control and performance. Fortran - another undervalued language (as PL/I but let's forget it) - if you need scientific calculations based on tested and proven routines, then it is your language. There has been a long time conversions to C++ for libraries but the amount of code (with weird syntax, nothing to do with calculation itself) will be many times what is needed writing the same code in Fortran - weird again. And it is very easy to read and comment. All these languages have compilers to almost any platform so porting is easy, they report the accurate warning/error positions and don't give up in first error (my gripe with C - the real problem may be 1000 lines back in some include file defined third time over but try to find it sometimes!)
Yes, I agree with many of the comments, it is important today to know C++, Java, C#, scripting languages (REXX is my favorite - Python is great, AWK has it's place, Tk/Tcl, PERL, PHP, JavaScript, VBS, etc each have their use) but this only because the business selects languages by whoever screams loudest, not what is most suitable for the problem in hand.
Maybe the focus is too much on languages instead of the solutions? Languages are (relatively) easy. If they are used in business I would assume that company has a CM/SC and well tested libraries in place already so any standard and routine will work independent of the language or platform. In new development I would recommend starting from that, build standard, language independent, well tested code and object libraries first. That is the way what I have seen business working a long, long time - maybe that's why Cobol doesn't go away, it just works on whatever you throw against it, no new, fancy coding needed - maybe call your new XML parser instead of your old parser or change the runtime library reference but that's just one liner. And move it from 32 to 64 bit or from Intel to IBM G6 just by compiling and it still works. Try that in C++ especially with floating point (not defined yet) or endian changes or xxP64 standards or whatever - good luck!
A good advice, there is a huge difference between JOB and being good in programming (whatever that means?) Much easier, as many have already said, learn the languages (the syntax) and the libraries (APIs, objects, whatever) used in application programming, that's what most of the companies are looking. The hard way - learn(!) the languages so you know how they are constructed, how they are different in different platforms and why (a wide field), etc. Very few companies and positions for that so an University is a good advice in that case. Then you (but don't count the companies) learn that languages are just tools to make the computers work.
Just be careful if you learn too much - after 20+ years coding in C on all kinds of system (8-64bit, small/big endian, with/without stack protection, controllers to mainframes, etc) I blew up a contract when asked how I would implement "atoi" if it didn't exist and I was stupid enough to ask on what platform! End of conversation - can't say that I'm sorry but it kind of describes the differences between application coding and knowing your language.
Maybe funny but look at the investments of some large Indian companies (no names.) Some are heavily investing or at least interested to invest for support centers in US. Computing is getting more and more global but, I have to say, Indians are fast learning where they can find not so expensive support. Good and bad, depends on how you look it.
"Amazing the number of "ignorance is bliss" responses on this thread. What you don't know is not allowed to hurt you. Wish I lived in that world." - me too! But maybe some live in a very small world (their own?) and maybe I don't want any part of that?
Seriously, ORDB (a free service) did more than most, some just cut the service but they announced it a long time ago. If the administrators are too lazy (or worse) to handle their side - what can you say? Now - to the comments of the unmanaged mail services, ouch!! Why and who would do that? It really is asking trouble!
Now - I still don't get black/block lists managed by some, even commercial, company? Everyone has a bias and at least I have been hit with filters which were based on, not spamming or such, an administrators view of the world, just because someone didn't like what was in that IP address or range. Almost did cost our company a huge contract!
In todays technology and fast computers, for a good advice see acme : http://acme.com/mail_filtering/sendmail_config_frameset.html/ , there are some good advices and don't let the date of the site fool you.
Yes, very obvious. Drop modifying URL ( or any other mechanism to identify ) - it has been obvious a long, long time. Drop modifying DNS ( or any other mechanism to identify source and/or origin ) - obvious a long, long time ago. And so on. Does anyone remember when ordering cars or car parts using a computer in 80's. Let's see - at least Toyota did that, I think Nissan and Volvo maybe at the same time. The requests got distributed depending of system, network and locality to a link to Japan, the country main location and if they had a local dealership with a system there also. So, this kind of processing is nothing new. Actually airlines used similar processing in a world wide network in 70's already. It wasn't for public but the mechanism was much the same except the systems were much more complicated because of the logistics. That the service is now offered by an external company should not be worth of a patent - they can copyright their code but patenting methods / algorithms? Weird because if we let acronym (URL, DNS, IP, SDLC, etc) usage and manipulation be patented it will be a wild west again.
I just hope that when you take your custom painted car to service you don't complain when other side of car is wiped clean. Or send your signed camera body for adjustment, signature is gone and the value did go down %80+! Or send an oil painting for frame fixing and instead of the original Van Gogh get back a painting from some local artist - it is an oil painting, even new and fresh!, what you are complaining. Or maybe an old photograph for restoration and they do so good job that clean all the text and names out of it - they definitely are not part of a photograph! And so on.. Actually all these are examples where the company doing the job had to pay, and most of time a lot because those can't get back. I also hope that you are not on the receiving end when telling a Harley Davidson guy that you just cleaned the paintings out of gas tank for extra service when fixing the valves.
First, Joels list :
1. Do you use source control?
2. Can you make a build in one step?
3. Do you make daily builds?
4. Do you have a bug database?
5. Do you fix bugs before writing new code?
6. Do you have an up-to-date schedule?
7. Do you have a spec?
8. Do programmers have quiet working conditions?
9. Do you use the best tools money can buy?
10. Do you have testers?
11. Do new candidates write code during their interview?
12. Do you do hallway usability testing?
has nothing to do with "superstar" programmer, it is just a rambling of common things mostly out of the control of any programmer. Superstar may be fast or may not, a mood point in lifetime a product. Superstar may or may not be a good corporate citizen, that is only to please the management. Superstar has opinions because he/she knows what he/she is talking. Superstar leads others, not that he/she wants but because what he/she is. Superstar listens even managers but makes his/hers own decisions. Superstar can be the worst programmer if forced to work against the best practices (he/she knows much better than any manager) or using the bad tools, etc especially when good ones are available. Superstar doesn't care what platform, language, operating system or business problem is - he/she gets the work done and teaches others aside. Superstar writes extensible and flexible systems that can run and be maintained "forever". And so on.. Now - (almost) all this goes against current management idea but sorry, you can't control a superstar, you can only give interesting problems to him/her to solve and if you want "good" results to support him/her. Superstars don't care of money BUT are very sensitive to that. Superstar can get bored or even agitated of the so common "carrots" as a corporate sign to your desk for work well done, etc. Superstars want to get out, they are actually very social and amazingly often very family oriented, so two, three seminars or development conferences a year will keep them more happy. NO - pony and dog shows will not do that, they hate those. A long list and you may ask what separates them from CEO's - they just haven't made up their mind to start own company!
Yes, Fire's, SupedDomes, clusters, distributed minis, even Google network and so on have their places in computing world but when it comes to my money, I hope it is run in a real mainframe. The difference is not just the raw power (more later) but the reliability. Tandem (HP NonStop) and Stratus get near but there still are small differences. Mainframes (IBM and IBM clones mainly, Univac/Unisys, Burroughs and Honeywell good second but mostly history today) are different, just different. IBM 360 (370/390/z whatever) may be old but still the only SIMPLE system which was created not by chance or comities but on sound engineering principles for usability, performance and reliability. Actually all you need is "Principles of Operation" (grown over years but still readable) and you can do whatever you want in that system. Nothing (not much anyway) hidden. There is no such document of any other system - DOS (heh!) used to have one but that's another story. Now, about performance. Simple systems can perform better in your PC than in a mainframe but when it comes to raw information (not just computational) performance nothing, not even Fire or SuperDome, can do the same. Combine that to almost unlimited recoverability on hardware, you get the picture. There is a price but the real ROI is much more than just the one time or even monthly hardware / software price.
"Actually, that's precisely what laws are for -- to protect the weak. The strong don't need protection. That's what the word "strong" means."
Thank you - now I understand why there are all the laws protecting the ruling class of their decisions and actions!
Back to topic - we have three grownup kids who have been in computers since they were able to use the keyboard. No problems but maybe it was because anything they didn't understand they did ask us. At teen, normal teens, sneaking out some nights, doing other things what teens do, etc but somehow always telling us later or sometimes even asking could they do this or that. Learned early on that two persons saying silly things may not hate each other but be the best friends who just happen to be fans of competing sport groups or whatever. Learned that words can be laughed (or cried) off but they can't hurt you. Actually never punished but often needed some long and fun talking. Why fun - brings back memories when you were at that age and did some equally stupid things. Yes - the responsibility is with parents but sometimes for one or another reason it just doesn't work. Nobody needs punishment but a little help might be in place. And people as the neighbor, I think people like that are already recognized what they are and in some societies they would have been told to change or to move on, no laws required. We all know some people like that but do we do anything for it is another story. A very old proverb "it takes a village to grow a child".
Should not but your reference is a little off in /. - remember "The Onion is not intended for readers under 18 years of age." There are some things here which should be screened out in ./ as sarcasm, unions, economy, etc , they just don't work too well with unskilled and undeveloped personalities, and I don't mean auto workers.
Correct! There are many people who know how but when you compare it to the projects where Ruby (or Java, or ..) is used what's the point. Headache and less pay. I'm not on level where microcode people (next level, more headache) are but have done my share low level coding (at the time when systems programmers were real) for anything from controllers and channel drivers to multi-processor memory managers and schedulers. Once you get it, you can code to any hardware. But who would like to do that with what is payed today - it's just coding, must be easy, no need to pay, no high return next quarter, etc. I still miss it, it is interesting, gives you a real picture how hardware works behind all these "high" level languages and libraries. Skills on that level are needed if you really want to know how any computer language works on any platform or why your multi-threading doesn't behave at is should or why you start getting protection failures when the cpu model changes or why some are never able to code for real-time systems. And this doesn't exclude high level languages - there have been OS's in COBOL, Algol, Lisp, PL/x etc which are not very low level languages but then you really have to know how they work.
Lately I have coded some memory, queue, restart etc routines for PDA's and mobiles - not my job really but too few people in project, the normal story - and it was fun again. You just look the hardware, what and how, and it is not difficult.
Here in Seattle - come and smell the real coffee. But don't go to Starbucks, any corner has a better coffee shop and real cups. And who drinks coffee out of paper or plastic mug anyway?? This city is full of free wifi places, not much reason to pay. Maybe not as good as S.F. but getting there.
"I do miss the good ol days though!!" - me too. I started in a big company where the old fashioned CEO pushed the code of ethics, inside and to the customers. Some of the competition did grow faster but also did go down down sooner or later, we just kept growing based on reputation. What happened later is sad, a new CEO, fortunately I had changed the company when I did see where it was going.
Ethics is personal, either a person or a community. It is also always based on truth - it may sometimes hurt (or at least not get you a job or security clearance) but on long run it pays back. I think people are getting more aware of that. You are not any more asked if you support this or that in politics, whatever but do you believe same ethics as the group asking. A supple difference but it is there, one is blind faith, one is believing to same basic rules.
Unfortunately in IT there still is this "good corporate citizen" mentality, close your eyes and you are told what and how to behave, forget anything else. You follow that and your job is secure, you can go up in ladders until you are the one telling the same. No problem as long as.. But be careful, sometimes corporate "ethics" don't match with current laws and regulations and if you are not yet on CxO level it may cost you a lot.
Excuse me - "extrememly sensitive information, including what everyone got paid" ?? What is the relation to ethics? Looking data ? What you would do with information can be ethical or not but what's the difference of CxO pay and an user e-mail, address, even name - it's just data to be processed? Maybe I don't get it? Or maybe I do - it is against corporate rules and they are the ultimate ethical code. Just don't ask me to build / test / fix any of those systems in such company, I only work on real data if you need correct results, fakes are cheaper. Sorry, just have had two systems built to imaginary data and assumptions and failing! And did I say, fixing those is more expensive, much!
For us ./:ters - read this. http://www.oreillynet.com/wateringhole/blog/ - I'm not advertising but it is the most hilarious for anyone in software business! Really, I'm not a coder (any more) but this hits it!
A good answer and good replies, mostly. No Wiki or any of these $xxxxxx packages can solve your problems! One thing I found a long (very long) time ago is that you can't compromise in documentation. I would change that "you need support" statement to "you only need the support of CEO and top management." The rest is, if not technically but politically, easy. But, the technology is there, frameworks and standards give a guidelines what and how, a lot depends how it is implemented. And today it is mostly IT, not much handwritten papers except signing them by your handwriting. ./ users - it really is beneficial to all (of us) if the documentation is up to date. Anyone argues? But it goes much further than making our lives easier, it is a business necessity!
Back to
IMHO the whole documentation problem is gone wrong - all vendors have different systems, methods and ignorant managers are buying one package after another without any idea what is the goal of documentation. Something has and will happen to documentation, again, because of the rules, regulations, laws, etc and because it really is one area in business where they can save a lot and be competitive. Don't hold your breath with current management!
It really is hilarious when I do see MS complaining IBM masterminding something like that. Must be a desperate manager somewhere in MS hierarchy! MS is business and, don't flame me, I really think they were better with BG on top. Now, I see more and more this kind of things coming out. Something is going is MS, they really are implementing more Open Source to their systems, they are buying or hiring more from Open Source, but keeping it very tight. I just hope they will follow the copyright laws they are so fond! MS has a lot of bright people but management sometimes doesn't give that impression. IBM is capable of any trick, they have shown that over years, but why would open standards be bad? Maybe for one company the proprietary methods and protocols are beneficial but what about the rest of the world? Just a stupid question, money, of course!
Yes, they should! But, unfortunately, no such paragraph in law books. Some countries do have that but it is against a capitalist system so you will not see it here. It has good and bad points, sometimes(?) the courts might just be biased and where you are then? But there should be some balances, I even think you should be able to sue politicians of their (paid?) decisions which are proved wrong later on - isn't that what democracy is? Or maybe a republic is not really a democracy?
Right! One talented musician I know got a lot of offers from music companies. Fortunately he was clever enough to take the offers to an lawyer. The advice was, by the way the math in parent is right, if you sell xx millions you still own the company. Now, if you sell xx millions more, you can make some money. Because he is he, not she who can be sold by looks, he refused. Plays wonderful music today which, unfortunately because of the system, very few can get. IMHO the system is weird but on the other hand, it is really a perfect picture of system where you do the work and someone else get the benefits. I leave to readers imagination what that system is?