Most sane people have already commented on your post. It's clear, you miss that whatever is being measured is based upon some standard. What that standard is will determine what is the normal circumstance of the thing being measured.
If it's dark skin, lights would be calibrated for that, to reveal contours as you say.
Since it's light skin, the current lighting is calibrated to reveal the contours of that skin type.
Well, the real question is what are you calibrating lighting against?
This has been a problem with TV and print media for some time. Ask black actors from the 60's about the problems they had in lighting and filming darker skin. Makeup wasn't designed for black people, and the lighting certainly didn't evolve with people of color in mind.
It's simple, white people were exclusive in these domains in this country forever, and as technology evolved around these domains, the built in bias determined zero consideration of anything other than "white" skin. It's not conscious it's institutional and has been, since forever, in this country. I mean the Egyptians, in their hieroglyphs, didn't have this problem with darker skin, go figure.
This is an old problem, and it's only obvious now because people of color have equal access to the technology, but unfortunately are not well represented in tech at all levels. Trust me if Steve Jobs was black or a darker skin tone, that iPhone camera and every app would work a lot differently on darker skin. Snapchat might even work for me so I could put some pink ears on my head.
Good thoughts.
Your impression though, brought me pause:
"but I'm a VERY expensive testing staff member"
Testing is expensive, period. As for your individual cost for service your provide, the modern tester who is an SDET or SEiT develops tests using a stack. Be it Java, Python or Ruby, they've got a specialized talent to write programs that test/break programs written by developers. SDET's and SEiT's are often paid on the same scale you are.
I will also admit, proudly, I have been in Managerial/Executive level positions advocating for pay parity of technical testers/testers with the cause being technical acumen parity w/ Devs.
Not exactly. This used to be true a while back, but Lawyers , looking out for their own best interest, unlike tech workers, stopped the practice. Your legal work between you and your attorney or the firm stays put. So no, that is not being outsourced.
Until tech workers unionize, which seem impossible due to the libertarian streak that runs in the blood it seems, you can expect a new low cost leader to come on deck. Forget India and China, they are too expensive. South America and Africa are next on deck. Good luck!
A fine example of why millennials need to work for someone before ever being given mantle of CEO. Whatever, it's America land of people who like bright shiny things, and a people who think that success is equal to genius. No the kid got lucky, but he's a tyrant wannabe Jobs, without 1/2 the imagination. Then again you don't need much to feed the simplistic self-obsessed nature of Americans these days.
Wow, snark, you must've worked on that all day. And your use of the word crappy, was high art. Considering how ignorant yo are of the world, I'm sure it represents the pinnacle of knowledge coming out of your unlearned gob.
Thanks for playing!
I would ask the opposite question, with all the things I can do and all the freedom I have as a tester, why in the hell would I ever want to be a developer.
Indeed. All these dumb cock-a-doodle-doers are the same build brekaers and shakey code creators which with certainty guarantees our continued employment. I look at these statements and just laugh all the way to the bank.
They think they get paid a lot too. It's such a farce when they had to post a qa position, obviously byt he comments, getting paid much more than most of their senior developers. Well I know this much, companies who give a crap about what they produce invest in QA and Test Engineering. It's the thing which separates great companies from wannabees.
Most are wannabees. Most developers are too if they do not understand what testing is and it's value to producing high quality purchasable software.
Spoken like a true bug creator. IT probably takes a team of 30 QA specialists to keep up with the number of faults and errors you introduce into code.
Life is good, I get to test forever. And you?
I couldn't imagine being a developer, doing the same rote work in and out. Your stack is chosen for you, as well as everything else. Bound up, can't move. At least I can boast of testing many different types of systems in many different languages. Many more than the average good developer has even had any exposure too. Developing software, boring compared to testing and breaking software to bits.
Doing this destructive behavior, much like a first person shooter with extensive approaches and logic, reveals ways we can make software better. Since it is rarely bettered by switching of technologies (COBOL vs. RUBY vs. PYTHON vs. SMALLTALK), who cares. Software still only operates at 80% of failure, and at best 80% of user expectations. Companies, especially here is lazy yet fast America, have a lack of focus on quality. And it shows. IT shows with every hack, vulnerability, every recall of a technology, most of the time it is a failure to accurately identify a fault. Something not borne only of QA but of the entire process up AND downstream. It is as much how software is developed as the tools used to develop any solution. That quality has not gone substantially up, we can assume technology at best is only a partial cure to maintaining an 80% solution.
The most asinine aspect of this, our, industry is the total boneheaded ignorance of testing by our group, the people and personalities that do it, and the condescending attitude toward something many barely understand. It's amusing, especially since testers get paid very well compared to developers these days. Our rarity makes us a sought after talent, when it matters and you actually have to sell something that works.
Yeah it's boring, so we find new ways to break your code. Yes it's repetitive, so now we get to build our own framework for testing. It costs money, exactly since spending a $1 here saves you $100000's when the customer finds a flaw. It's a good spend. IF you want to get educated as to what testing is, try it some time, beyond the simplistic unit and integration test. We get to examine and use many types of technologies AS WE SEE FIT to discover vulnerability. We're not tied to your ways, methods or practices in the practicing of our profession. We get to design things from the ground up, revise, modify and improve, if done correctly 24/7. It's part of OUR job as testers.
So now that's a sniff of what we do, we enjoy our work as much as you and no need to pity us. We're doing just fine. After all, no matter the tech stack, developers are so full of hubris about their capabilities; I am ensured a job as long as I wish to work. Your existence insures that, developer.
Thanks for playing.
Yeah I never understood developers either, same old stuff day in and day out, meanwhile I devise new ways to break your produced output. See, I can read your code, I understand how it works, I can see where you got sloppy or simply forgot something, I see a p1 on my mantle, and I also see a way to help you become a better programmer by alerting you to the vulnerability you design "in", thereby making the product better now and the next time you touch a keyboard.
It does take all types, and if it weren't for testers, there would be no software industry and really no products wpeople would want to ever buy. If you don't understand testing, which 90% of developers don't, I suggest a remedial course.
Just a small suggestion to enhance your understanding.
Assholes are assholes. They stink, and are terrible for any org. Your post, turning it into a positive is simply silliness. That word must have some positive value to you. Sad if it does.
Yes a UNION! Information Worker's should've already unionized. The problem, the millennials and even some older cats with idealistic Ayn Rand dreams of meritocracy and liberty.
It's simply time to overthrow the place. America is excellent at destabilizing govts. Whatever happens afterward can be South Korea's concern. They fire that missle, we should strike them viciously and reduce the entire country to nothing.
LOL, and I paid $25 for my OS X upgrade to Lion. Microsoft users are such rubes. I get full playback and a fully functioning development environment for FREE.
The fact the GPU is integrated, means blindingly fast transfer rates between the processors. Most likely in the THz region, which is awesome. You should see some gains, and expect this type of arch to dominate procs in the future. I also suspect that with the advent and continuing advances in graphene nano tech, things should start getting interesting very fast, and at lower power consumption to boot.
It's about the e2e experience not just about the software. I for one would not want to run most of the apps avail on Android due to how they behave or misbehave as you would have it. I like the Apple way, not really interested in other attempts as they would ruin the overall ue.
Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
"Take on iOS?" What the hell are people smoking? The Apple devices offer a pure e2e experience. There is no competition within that space that does nto reveal APple, once again, got it right. people like the walls, albeit a little annoyed , at times, with the control issues (Flash, Porn). But the fact is Apple makes wonderful devices for the consumer that simply work , are seamlessly integrated, and have high quality usable apps. the markets are not the same, and people how buy tablets could give a rats ass about Ubuntu, Red Hat, Linux or anything else hackers/engineers think is important.
Your 100% wrong. It depends on the interviewer and they still use dumb brain teasers.
Heres one I received:
"Imagine you've been shrunk to a size where you could fit in a blender"
me: "Am I insect size as in a flea or larger like a frog?"
"larger than a flea, but smaller than a frog. Small enough to fit on the blade."
Me: "Oh, ok. In that case I would use my super springs attached to my feet and jump out. I'd use springs since my jet boots would have been left at home, out of fuel ya know."
"Um, that's interesting. Any other ideas?"
Me: "Yes, I would use my transporter and teleport out of the blender. You propose a fantastic proposition, I have answered thusly."
Um, this was for a Test Engineering Management position. I'm so happy I never worked there. What a bunch of pompous arses.
Slashdot Mirror
Most sane people have already commented on your post. It's clear, you miss that whatever is being measured is based upon some standard. What that standard is will determine what is the normal circumstance of the thing being measured. If it's dark skin, lights would be calibrated for that, to reveal contours as you say. Since it's light skin, the current lighting is calibrated to reveal the contours of that skin type.
Well, the real question is what are you calibrating lighting against? This has been a problem with TV and print media for some time. Ask black actors from the 60's about the problems they had in lighting and filming darker skin. Makeup wasn't designed for black people, and the lighting certainly didn't evolve with people of color in mind. It's simple, white people were exclusive in these domains in this country forever, and as technology evolved around these domains, the built in bias determined zero consideration of anything other than "white" skin. It's not conscious it's institutional and has been, since forever, in this country. I mean the Egyptians, in their hieroglyphs, didn't have this problem with darker skin, go figure. This is an old problem, and it's only obvious now because people of color have equal access to the technology, but unfortunately are not well represented in tech at all levels. Trust me if Steve Jobs was black or a darker skin tone, that iPhone camera and every app would work a lot differently on darker skin. Snapchat might even work for me so I could put some pink ears on my head.
Good thoughts. Your impression though, brought me pause: "but I'm a VERY expensive testing staff member" Testing is expensive, period. As for your individual cost for service your provide, the modern tester who is an SDET or SEiT develops tests using a stack. Be it Java, Python or Ruby, they've got a specialized talent to write programs that test/break programs written by developers. SDET's and SEiT's are often paid on the same scale you are. I will also admit, proudly, I have been in Managerial/Executive level positions advocating for pay parity of technical testers/testers with the cause being technical acumen parity w/ Devs.
Not exactly. This used to be true a while back, but Lawyers , looking out for their own best interest, unlike tech workers, stopped the practice. Your legal work between you and your attorney or the firm stays put. So no, that is not being outsourced. Until tech workers unionize, which seem impossible due to the libertarian streak that runs in the blood it seems, you can expect a new low cost leader to come on deck. Forget India and China, they are too expensive. South America and Africa are next on deck. Good luck!
Seems to me it's typical hubris from govt.
A fine example of why millennials need to work for someone before ever being given mantle of CEO. Whatever, it's America land of people who like bright shiny things, and a people who think that success is equal to genius. No the kid got lucky, but he's a tyrant wannabe Jobs, without 1/2 the imagination. Then again you don't need much to feed the simplistic self-obsessed nature of Americans these days.
Wow, snark, you must've worked on that all day. And your use of the word crappy, was high art. Considering how ignorant yo are of the world, I'm sure it represents the pinnacle of knowledge coming out of your unlearned gob. Thanks for playing!
I would ask the opposite question, with all the things I can do and all the freedom I have as a tester, why in the hell would I ever want to be a developer.
Indeed. All these dumb cock-a-doodle-doers are the same build brekaers and shakey code creators which with certainty guarantees our continued employment. I look at these statements and just laugh all the way to the bank. They think they get paid a lot too. It's such a farce when they had to post a qa position, obviously byt he comments, getting paid much more than most of their senior developers. Well I know this much, companies who give a crap about what they produce invest in QA and Test Engineering. It's the thing which separates great companies from wannabees. Most are wannabees. Most developers are too if they do not understand what testing is and it's value to producing high quality purchasable software.
Spoken like a true bug creator. IT probably takes a team of 30 QA specialists to keep up with the number of faults and errors you introduce into code. Life is good, I get to test forever. And you?
I couldn't imagine being a developer, doing the same rote work in and out. Your stack is chosen for you, as well as everything else. Bound up, can't move. At least I can boast of testing many different types of systems in many different languages. Many more than the average good developer has even had any exposure too. Developing software, boring compared to testing and breaking software to bits. Doing this destructive behavior, much like a first person shooter with extensive approaches and logic, reveals ways we can make software better. Since it is rarely bettered by switching of technologies (COBOL vs. RUBY vs. PYTHON vs. SMALLTALK), who cares. Software still only operates at 80% of failure, and at best 80% of user expectations. Companies, especially here is lazy yet fast America, have a lack of focus on quality. And it shows. IT shows with every hack, vulnerability, every recall of a technology, most of the time it is a failure to accurately identify a fault. Something not borne only of QA but of the entire process up AND downstream. It is as much how software is developed as the tools used to develop any solution. That quality has not gone substantially up, we can assume technology at best is only a partial cure to maintaining an 80% solution. The most asinine aspect of this, our, industry is the total boneheaded ignorance of testing by our group, the people and personalities that do it, and the condescending attitude toward something many barely understand. It's amusing, especially since testers get paid very well compared to developers these days. Our rarity makes us a sought after talent, when it matters and you actually have to sell something that works. Yeah it's boring, so we find new ways to break your code. Yes it's repetitive, so now we get to build our own framework for testing. It costs money, exactly since spending a $1 here saves you $100000's when the customer finds a flaw. It's a good spend. IF you want to get educated as to what testing is, try it some time, beyond the simplistic unit and integration test. We get to examine and use many types of technologies AS WE SEE FIT to discover vulnerability. We're not tied to your ways, methods or practices in the practicing of our profession. We get to design things from the ground up, revise, modify and improve, if done correctly 24/7. It's part of OUR job as testers. So now that's a sniff of what we do, we enjoy our work as much as you and no need to pity us. We're doing just fine. After all, no matter the tech stack, developers are so full of hubris about their capabilities; I am ensured a job as long as I wish to work. Your existence insures that, developer. Thanks for playing.
Yeah I never understood developers either, same old stuff day in and day out, meanwhile I devise new ways to break your produced output. See, I can read your code, I understand how it works, I can see where you got sloppy or simply forgot something, I see a p1 on my mantle, and I also see a way to help you become a better programmer by alerting you to the vulnerability you design "in", thereby making the product better now and the next time you touch a keyboard. It does take all types, and if it weren't for testers, there would be no software industry and really no products wpeople would want to ever buy. If you don't understand testing, which 90% of developers don't, I suggest a remedial course. Just a small suggestion to enhance your understanding.
Assholes are assholes. They stink, and are terrible for any org. Your post, turning it into a positive is simply silliness. That word must have some positive value to you. Sad if it does.
ROTFL!
Yes a UNION! Information Worker's should've already unionized. The problem, the millennials and even some older cats with idealistic Ayn Rand dreams of meritocracy and liberty.
It's simply time to overthrow the place. America is excellent at destabilizing govts. Whatever happens afterward can be South Korea's concern. They fire that missle, we should strike them viciously and reduce the entire country to nothing.
Yes, I do, especially of an Apple product. Everything else is just useless mindless crap that clutters.
LOL, and I paid $25 for my OS X upgrade to Lion. Microsoft users are such rubes. I get full playback and a fully functioning development environment for FREE.
The fact the GPU is integrated, means blindingly fast transfer rates between the processors. Most likely in the THz region, which is awesome. You should see some gains, and expect this type of arch to dominate procs in the future. I also suspect that with the advent and continuing advances in graphene nano tech, things should start getting interesting very fast, and at lower power consumption to boot.
It's about the e2e experience not just about the software. I for one would not want to run most of the apps avail on Android due to how they behave or misbehave as you would have it. I like the Apple way, not really interested in other attempts as they would ruin the overall ue. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
"Take on iOS?" What the hell are people smoking? The Apple devices offer a pure e2e experience. There is no competition within that space that does nto reveal APple, once again, got it right. people like the walls, albeit a little annoyed , at times, with the control issues (Flash, Porn). But the fact is Apple makes wonderful devices for the consumer that simply work , are seamlessly integrated, and have high quality usable apps. the markets are not the same, and people how buy tablets could give a rats ass about Ubuntu, Red Hat, Linux or anything else hackers/engineers think is important.
Your 100% wrong. It depends on the interviewer and they still use dumb brain teasers. Heres one I received: "Imagine you've been shrunk to a size where you could fit in a blender" me: "Am I insect size as in a flea or larger like a frog?" "larger than a flea, but smaller than a frog. Small enough to fit on the blade." Me: "Oh, ok. In that case I would use my super springs attached to my feet and jump out. I'd use springs since my jet boots would have been left at home, out of fuel ya know." "Um, that's interesting. Any other ideas?" Me: "Yes, I would use my transporter and teleport out of the blender. You propose a fantastic proposition, I have answered thusly." Um, this was for a Test Engineering Management position. I'm so happy I never worked there. What a bunch of pompous arses.
Describe in single words. Only the good things that come to your mind. About your mother. Awesome!