Why is Google not updating v8? And where is Java update? If Microsoft rushes to update their software before others, it is kind of telling. Well, good job for MS.
It's still credit even if you pay it off once a month. How quickly you pay it off doesn't matter. You're buying things and paying them off later, that's the definition of credit.
(4) It's way too easy to be given, to hear or to type in the wrong bank account number and for businesses to say they never got the credit. You get one number wrong and you've just credited some random guy a lot of money which you may never see again.
No, bank numbers have check digits. If you typo some number the payment will not go through.
You get convenience with banking too. I only watch over my bank account. I use visa/mastercard debit card too, so it is instantly removed from my account. Living on credit is stupid.
Why are you even using credit cards to pay bills? In Europe bank transfers are used for such and are entirely free for consumers. Companies have to pay some if they have huge amount of transfers. And that is within the whole SEPA-zone (most of western european countries) too, so it's not an issue between different jurisdictions and size.
This is completely reverse to what companies in my country have started doing. For a long time companies have started pushing people to use internet billing, and if you still want paper bill then that costs extra (because it really does, with printing and mailing). Sending invoice or auto-billing via internet saves them a lot, so I'm not sure I understand why Verizon would want to do thi.. oh right, more $$$.
GoDaddy should be known by everyone, but Imgur is quite obscure. It's just one of those image hosting sites, there's hundreds of them. I only remember it now because I browse TF2 pics on Reddit and couple of days ago noticed it's quite well integrated into Reddit. I've probably used Imgur before too, but image hosting sites aren't exactly brands you easily remember.
Wi-Fi coverage is hindered by the fact that people have tried to explicitly set up Wi-Fi networks. This only makes it economical if users are charged for access and even then limits the availability to highly populated areas. But there's vending machines in many places - just throw in Wi-Fi hotspot in them and eventually you will get huge coverage and the costs are subsidized in the vending machine buying/renting price. If you need to make money on top of that, throwing in an ad or two should do the trick and keep the service free for anyone.
Google and Firefox are not competitors. Competitors don't go buying each-other products.
Yes they do. The most obvious example being mobile phone and tech world. There are only a few companies in the world that own fabs so all companies are buying parts from them. Even when they have competing products overally, ie. they both sell smart phones. For example Samsung owns fabs that do parts for Apple, even while they both also sell phones.
It's business, it's not a bitter relationship with an ex-gf. Competing businesses can do business when it suits them while still competing in slightly relevant area without personal feeling getting in the way.
Do you really think that it will be banks covering the costs? That never happens. It's always the merchant. Charity or not. The 250,000 comes from my knowledge of chargeback fees being $25-40 for merchants. With around 10,000 current credit cards exploited, I actually took the lowest possibility of $25 per chargeback and didn't even account for multiple donations per card. The fees can be much higher too, but it is at least $250,000.
The credit card numbers they stole and exposed were used to make over one million dollars worth of "donations" to different charities like Red Cross, Save the Children and CARE. Good job Anonymous!
Except that they were all reversed with chargebacks, which not only took back all the money given, it actually cost the charities around $250 000 in chargeback fees which are now off from what other, legit people donated. Awesome job there! Idiots...
You believe there is a need for IT department, but even you have rough time determining what that need would be. If you cannot think of a reason yourself, why are you suggesting it to begin with?
I do know that the food pyramid takes into account that fats, even though you must consume them or risk malnutrition, you should eat very little of them, especially if you are sedentary, because you won't burn the huge amount of calories you would ingest.
Actually, fats are easy to burn and they burn more healthier too (slowly, but you feel full for much longer). The problem is when you mix lots of fat with lots of carbs. Fats can't burn before your body has burned fast carbs. At the same time, fast carbs make you want more food sooner than fat does. In the end you still have some fat left that would had got time to burn if it wasn't for the carbs. This is also why pizza is bad. Not because it contains fat, but because it contains high amount of both carbs and fat.
In my opinion, the official food guide pyramids are unhealthy in many countries. They consist mostly of fast carbs. Those aren't that good to you, but I understand that they were good choice before, especially in countries with long winters.
You know what rice, pasta, noodles, potatoes, grain, pizza and similar have in common? They have, historically, been food of low class people. They were what even the people with not so much money could get. While good food like meat, fish and similar are still pricier than the foods with fast carbs, they are generally available to everyone thanks to increase in our technological knowledge and means of mass producing food.
This is why I find it mind blowing that the official food guide pyramids still promote fast carbs so much. They should not be your main source of energy. They are needed, but not at the amounts people eat them today. The ratio should be more like 33%/33%/33%, or even have more fat and protein than carbs. Pizza isn't bad because it contains fat, it's bad because it contains mixture of high amount of fast carbs and fat, and generally not that much vitamins. If people lowered the amount of carbs they take then they would be both more healthier and more lean.
He said there was no other people working who could had done it, ie. programmers.
The funny thing is he is even saying that he has lot of down time in work. Instead of being a total jerk jabbering about how his job description doesn't include writing software, but would still like the challenge (and did it), he could have used that down time to actually just write the software and help the company a bit instead of sitting around doing nothing.
Seriously, if I were his boss and I read this, my head would implode. He even admits that he just sits around at work doing nothing. He then says this would had improved everything a lot, but gee, this closely related task isn't in his work description! And that is even without the fact that he then goes out and writes the software, and is now thinking about asking the company if they can pay money for it on top of the salary he gets. What a total ass!
I would never hire anyone with such attitude. There are lots of sysadmins and programmers without work that have much better attitude. People who would actually care about the company and their work. If you want to be paid only for your job description, go do paid consultation work. Right, then you couldn't just sit around doing nothing at work time and get paid salary.
The whole U.S. is established on the idea of God and religion. It's everywhere in the U.S. culture. That fact alone tells that U.S. has never been about, or seek to know, science. Science tends to look at the world in terms of numbers, technology and confirmed facts. Religion tends to tell the world has been made by some imaginary person in the sky, tells you to pray towards said imaginary person and completely disregards science in favor of what someone wrote on paper 1500-2000 years ago. They are not compatible.
Now here's a crazy question to those of you believe in god. The whole world is full of lunatics, alcoholics, drug users and pathological liars, and has always been. Hell, it doesn't even have to be a "bad" thing. Many people have great amount of imagination. What makes you think those stories weren't made up by either drunk persons, someone who wanted to tell a story or someone who just wanted to play with people?
On that matter, stories always change when they are passed from people to people. This is like 1-2th grade stuff. I still remember when my first grade teacher demonstrated this by whispering something to a student, who then whispered it to next person and so on. After all of us in the class had passed it forward, the meaning was completely different with added "fun stuff" and things that didn't even make sense.
Why do you think the bible is a good representation of how things actually went? Why do you think it's even true at all? It could just as well be based on some old stories that have changed when going from people to people, or better yet, some drunk or drug using guy just wrote it 2000 years ago. Just think about it.
Freedom. Individual Americans have the freedom to discuss and try things, even unpopular or politically- or economically-incorrect alternatives to the current paradigm. Flexibility. When that which is popular or politically ascendant or otherwise "approved" turns out to be wrong, the alternatives are eventually tried. Unfree societies stamp out "error" and inflexible ones don't accept change.
Are you sure you want to make that statement? There are tons of things you cannot do in the U.S., restricted by either laws or socially. There are things that are completely frowned upon by U.S. but that are lawful, ok and even normal things elsewhere. Hell, U.S. even thinks there's something wrong with nudity while at the same time promotes violence. There are also countless amount of things that are restricted by laws, and discussing and promoting certain views are also limited. For example, U.S. tries very hard to shut down Taliban and Al Qaeda websites (which only promote their speech and ideals).
Of course, you probably think it's fully ok for U.S. government to limit these things. But guess what, so does Chinese nationals about the laws in their country. They do not want an unrest, so they think government trying to avoid that is fine. At the same time they're also laughing at some of the views of U.S. people, just like you do about Chinese views.
Apart from making the whole web more interconnected between different websites, web browsers starting to look and behave more like iPad, complete with push notifications and geolocation, and HTML5 ads replacing majority of flash based ads, the article also predicts that browser makers will start to introduce App Stores within their browsers. In fact, Chrome already has one.Facebook will also get a lot more seamlessly integrated with your desktop, including file system access, photo syncing and widgets on your screen. There will also be an increasing amount of HTML5 based social games and online cloud based apps that replace every functionality you needed desktop apps for. All of these changes and features will start to blur the line between desktop and browser and will also bring your social graph more closely into contact with your traditional desktop experience.
So why not start with an open source game? Start with ioquake, or now the new iodoom3? http://www.iodoom3.org/ YOu start by analyzing a existing game, and then build on it. The whole concept of open source...
So you really want to bore them to begin with? Analyzing someones existing code is a really tedious work for even existing programmers. On top of that they wouldn't get to imagine and make what they actually do want to make. Your whole suggestion is terrible.
If you want to "build upon it", there are far better solutions, like modding Valve's games. Garry's mod is really fun too. Yes, they aren't open source, but do you really want to draconically push such views on newcomers? Because if you do, then congratulations, you just ruined all the fun from starting programming.
But you can't use something that must be licensed for them. These kids need to learn a skill they can go home and practice - if any of them are going to use the skills they learn from you, the tools required had better damn well be Free and Open to them.
I really don't see how licensing would play any role in this. Those kids aren't making games (or apps) to sell them, not yet. Licensing mostly applies to that only. Hell, now a days even Microsoft offers Visual Studio for free if you don't sell the programs created with it.
No, because that isn't fun and will just drive them away from programming. Nobody picks up a hobby or starts learning about something because of the technical details of it. They start doing it to accomplish or make something they want. Coding some fun little games (and tons of unfinished ones!) is the best way for kids to keep interest in programming. When I was a kid and also as teen, I really didn't care about algorithms or making myself think about programming as logical way. I wanted to make fun stuff. Everything else came later, after I've already established that programming was fun and I wanted to learn more about it. This included tons of reading and learning which I wouldn't had done without the initial spark in it.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is Google not updating v8? And where is Java update? If Microsoft rushes to update their software before others, it is kind of telling. Well, good job for MS.
It's still credit even if you pay it off once a month. How quickly you pay it off doesn't matter. You're buying things and paying them off later, that's the definition of credit.
(4) It's way too easy to be given, to hear or to type in the wrong bank account number and for businesses to say they never got the credit. You get one number wrong and you've just credited some random guy a lot of money which you may never see again.
No, bank numbers have check digits. If you typo some number the payment will not go through.
You get convenience with banking too. I only watch over my bank account. I use visa/mastercard debit card too, so it is instantly removed from my account. Living on credit is stupid.
Why are you even using credit cards to pay bills? In Europe bank transfers are used for such and are entirely free for consumers. Companies have to pay some if they have huge amount of transfers. And that is within the whole SEPA-zone (most of western european countries) too, so it's not an issue between different jurisdictions and size.
This is completely reverse to what companies in my country have started doing. For a long time companies have started pushing people to use internet billing, and if you still want paper bill then that costs extra (because it really does, with printing and mailing). Sending invoice or auto-billing via internet saves them a lot, so I'm not sure I understand why Verizon would want to do thi.. oh right, more $$$.
GoDaddy should be known by everyone, but Imgur is quite obscure. It's just one of those image hosting sites, there's hundreds of them. I only remember it now because I browse TF2 pics on Reddit and couple of days ago noticed it's quite well integrated into Reddit. I've probably used Imgur before too, but image hosting sites aren't exactly brands you easily remember.
Chrome has been gaining share at Firefox's expense,
Really?
Your own link clearly shows it is the case. Just because other browsers are also losing market share doesn't mean Firefox isn't losing.
Wi-Fi coverage is hindered by the fact that people have tried to explicitly set up Wi-Fi networks. This only makes it economical if users are charged for access and even then limits the availability to highly populated areas. But there's vending machines in many places - just throw in Wi-Fi hotspot in them and eventually you will get huge coverage and the costs are subsidized in the vending machine buying/renting price. If you need to make money on top of that, throwing in an ad or two should do the trick and keep the service free for anyone.
Stratfor CEO has actually been criticizing the war in Iran.
Actually, DuckDuckGo uses Bing.
Google and Firefox are not competitors. Competitors don't go buying each-other products.
Yes they do. The most obvious example being mobile phone and tech world. There are only a few companies in the world that own fabs so all companies are buying parts from them. Even when they have competing products overally, ie. they both sell smart phones. For example Samsung owns fabs that do parts for Apple, even while they both also sell phones.
It's business, it's not a bitter relationship with an ex-gf. Competing businesses can do business when it suits them while still competing in slightly relevant area without personal feeling getting in the way.
Like the anonymous coward below notes, I actually took it too low. AIDG gets charged $35 per chargeback, so it's probably more like $350,000 or more.
Do you really think that it will be banks covering the costs? That never happens. It's always the merchant. Charity or not. The 250,000 comes from my knowledge of chargeback fees being $25-40 for merchants. With around 10,000 current credit cards exploited, I actually took the lowest possibility of $25 per chargeback and didn't even account for multiple donations per card. The fees can be much higher too, but it is at least $250,000.
The credit card numbers they stole and exposed were used to make over one million dollars worth of "donations" to different charities like Red Cross, Save the Children and CARE. Good job Anonymous!
Except that they were all reversed with chargebacks, which not only took back all the money given, it actually cost the charities around $250 000 in chargeback fees which are now off from what other, legit people donated. Awesome job there! Idiots...
You believe there is a need for IT department, but even you have rough time determining what that need would be. If you cannot think of a reason yourself, why are you suggesting it to begin with?
I do know that the food pyramid takes into account that fats, even though you must consume them or risk malnutrition, you should eat very little of them, especially if you are sedentary, because you won't burn the huge amount of calories you would ingest.
Actually, fats are easy to burn and they burn more healthier too (slowly, but you feel full for much longer). The problem is when you mix lots of fat with lots of carbs. Fats can't burn before your body has burned fast carbs. At the same time, fast carbs make you want more food sooner than fat does. In the end you still have some fat left that would had got time to burn if it wasn't for the carbs. This is also why pizza is bad. Not because it contains fat, but because it contains high amount of both carbs and fat.
In my opinion, the official food guide pyramids are unhealthy in many countries. They consist mostly of fast carbs. Those aren't that good to you, but I understand that they were good choice before, especially in countries with long winters.
You know what rice, pasta, noodles, potatoes, grain, pizza and similar have in common? They have, historically, been food of low class people. They were what even the people with not so much money could get. While good food like meat, fish and similar are still pricier than the foods with fast carbs, they are generally available to everyone thanks to increase in our technological knowledge and means of mass producing food.
This is why I find it mind blowing that the official food guide pyramids still promote fast carbs so much. They should not be your main source of energy. They are needed, but not at the amounts people eat them today. The ratio should be more like 33%/33%/33%, or even have more fat and protein than carbs. Pizza isn't bad because it contains fat, it's bad because it contains mixture of high amount of fast carbs and fat, and generally not that much vitamins. If people lowered the amount of carbs they take then they would be both more healthier and more lean.
He said there was no other people working who could had done it, ie. programmers.
The funny thing is he is even saying that he has lot of down time in work. Instead of being a total jerk jabbering about how his job description doesn't include writing software, but would still like the challenge (and did it), he could have used that down time to actually just write the software and help the company a bit instead of sitting around doing nothing.
Seriously, if I were his boss and I read this, my head would implode. He even admits that he just sits around at work doing nothing. He then says this would had improved everything a lot, but gee, this closely related task isn't in his work description! And that is even without the fact that he then goes out and writes the software, and is now thinking about asking the company if they can pay money for it on top of the salary he gets. What a total ass!
I would never hire anyone with such attitude. There are lots of sysadmins and programmers without work that have much better attitude. People who would actually care about the company and their work. If you want to be paid only for your job description, go do paid consultation work. Right, then you couldn't just sit around doing nothing at work time and get paid salary.
The whole U.S. is established on the idea of God and religion. It's everywhere in the U.S. culture. That fact alone tells that U.S. has never been about, or seek to know, science. Science tends to look at the world in terms of numbers, technology and confirmed facts. Religion tends to tell the world has been made by some imaginary person in the sky, tells you to pray towards said imaginary person and completely disregards science in favor of what someone wrote on paper 1500-2000 years ago. They are not compatible.
Now here's a crazy question to those of you believe in god. The whole world is full of lunatics, alcoholics, drug users and pathological liars, and has always been. Hell, it doesn't even have to be a "bad" thing. Many people have great amount of imagination. What makes you think those stories weren't made up by either drunk persons, someone who wanted to tell a story or someone who just wanted to play with people?
On that matter, stories always change when they are passed from people to people. This is like 1-2th grade stuff. I still remember when my first grade teacher demonstrated this by whispering something to a student, who then whispered it to next person and so on. After all of us in the class had passed it forward, the meaning was completely different with added "fun stuff" and things that didn't even make sense.
Why do you think the bible is a good representation of how things actually went? Why do you think it's even true at all? It could just as well be based on some old stories that have changed when going from people to people, or better yet, some drunk or drug using guy just wrote it 2000 years ago. Just think about it.
Freedom. Individual Americans have the freedom to discuss and try things, even unpopular or politically- or economically-incorrect alternatives to the current paradigm. Flexibility. When that which is popular or politically ascendant or otherwise "approved" turns out to be wrong, the alternatives are eventually tried. Unfree societies stamp out "error" and inflexible ones don't accept change.
Are you sure you want to make that statement? There are tons of things you cannot do in the U.S., restricted by either laws or socially. There are things that are completely frowned upon by U.S. but that are lawful, ok and even normal things elsewhere. Hell, U.S. even thinks there's something wrong with nudity while at the same time promotes violence. There are also countless amount of things that are restricted by laws, and discussing and promoting certain views are also limited. For example, U.S. tries very hard to shut down Taliban and Al Qaeda websites (which only promote their speech and ideals).
Of course, you probably think it's fully ok for U.S. government to limit these things. But guess what, so does Chinese nationals about the laws in their country. They do not want an unrest, so they think government trying to avoid that is fine. At the same time they're also laughing at some of the views of U.S. people, just like you do about Chinese views.
Apart from making the whole web more interconnected between different websites, web browsers starting to look and behave more like iPad, complete with push notifications and geolocation, and HTML5 ads replacing majority of flash based ads, the article also predicts that browser makers will start to introduce App Stores within their browsers. In fact, Chrome already has one.Facebook will also get a lot more seamlessly integrated with your desktop, including file system access, photo syncing and widgets on your screen. There will also be an increasing amount of HTML5 based social games and online cloud based apps that replace every functionality you needed desktop apps for. All of these changes and features will start to blur the line between desktop and browser and will also bring your social graph more closely into contact with your traditional desktop experience.
So why not start with an open source game? Start with ioquake, or now the new iodoom3? http://www.iodoom3.org/ YOu start by analyzing a existing game, and then build on it. The whole concept of open source...
So you really want to bore them to begin with? Analyzing someones existing code is a really tedious work for even existing programmers. On top of that they wouldn't get to imagine and make what they actually do want to make. Your whole suggestion is terrible.
If you want to "build upon it", there are far better solutions, like modding Valve's games. Garry's mod is really fun too. Yes, they aren't open source, but do you really want to draconically push such views on newcomers? Because if you do, then congratulations, you just ruined all the fun from starting programming.
But you can't use something that must be licensed for them. These kids need to learn a skill they can go home and practice - if any of them are going to use the skills they learn from you, the tools required had better damn well be Free and Open to them.
I really don't see how licensing would play any role in this. Those kids aren't making games (or apps) to sell them, not yet. Licensing mostly applies to that only. Hell, now a days even Microsoft offers Visual Studio for free if you don't sell the programs created with it.
No, because that isn't fun and will just drive them away from programming. Nobody picks up a hobby or starts learning about something because of the technical details of it. They start doing it to accomplish or make something they want. Coding some fun little games (and tons of unfinished ones!) is the best way for kids to keep interest in programming. When I was a kid and also as teen, I really didn't care about algorithms or making myself think about programming as logical way. I wanted to make fun stuff. Everything else came later, after I've already established that programming was fun and I wanted to learn more about it. This included tons of reading and learning which I wouldn't had done without the initial spark in it.