I don't know what kind of programmer you're refering to. It took me five years to get my degree in Computer Engineering, plus a lot more time of ongoing education since I graduated in 1990. That was an extra five years after getting my associate degree.
I actually have very little respect for doctors' attitude that 'we save lives'. So do I when I design control systems running heavy machinery, or avionics, or run an industrial plant, or whatever. Like any other profession, medicine is full of people who aren't as capable as others. The problem I see with doctors is that they all want us to believe that they're 'hollier than thou'. I don't accept that. If a doctor fucks up, a patient dies. If an avionics software engineer fucks up, a couple of hundred people die.
If the state of the medical profession, HMOs, drug manufacturers, and other health services in the United States is any indication, I'd much rather be an unlicensed software engineer than an "ethical" doctor. Why is it that medicines and medical attention cost as much as ten times as what they cost in other countries?
As for the cool technologies OSS has today, keep in mind that a great majority of them are re-implementations of software developed privately or under a university grant. Somebody did the research and h4x0rs re-implemented it. I support OSS (and not GPL'd, by the way; other licences like BSD are more to my liking but that's me), so don't go flaming me for this comment. A h4x0r != software engineer, though often a software engineer is also a h4x0r. People forget (even on/.) that coding is only the smallest part of the profession. System design, knowing how to analyze and apply the correct algorithms, understanding the OS (or how to build one), the compilers (or how to build them), and so on are as valuable as coding. I met many h4x0rs, even employed software "professionals" who don't have a clue of how to code something as simple as a Quick Sort.
Last time I checked, there are all kinds of charlatans developing 'miracle cures' and diets and what have you that, in the end, try to pass for members of the health industry. Turn midnight TV on and see for yourself.
I had a Casio G Shock watch for a few years that does everything this one does, with barometer/altimeter, compass, etc. plus a few other functions that this one lacks. It cost about $120 five years ago and works *great*. The altimeter/barometer is accurate to 10,000 ft/agl (I tested often; I'm a skydiver). The compass is very accurate.
The watch itself is all digital, with an LCD instead of hands. You can probably find it cheaper on eBay than what I paid for it.
I deployed a number of Xenix installations in the mid- to late 1980's, the last one in either 1989 or 1990. We were competing against Novell Netware networks (back when TeleVideo made that hideous Novell dedicated hardware with the 286 and the Z-80 and all the way to the IBM PS/2 model 80 days) and usually beat them hands down for an inventory and POS application. Our customers were medium-size enterprises (up to 200 employees, up to five physical locations). The configuration:
HP Vectra 286 with 1 MB RAM (!!!) and 60 MB HD
12 RS-232C port expansion (for terminals)
Up to 12 TTY
App developed by my company
SCO Xenix (can't remember the version)
The advantages of using this:
Cost
Ease of maintenance
Rich tool set for the sys admins
High ROI (return on investment) for our customers
Higher profits for my company
NCR *nix, Xenix, Minix, and AIX 3.0 were the first *nix OSs I was involved with, back in 1985 and forward. I went from Apple's Applesoft/ProDOS/MacOS/UCSD Pascal to *nix, then to Microsoft's world.
All in all, I remember Xenix being one of the most complete *nix environments I played with. Only AIX running on RS/6000 (I was working on them prior to the announcement in March 1990) was more complete in its blend of SV and BSD tools. SCO occasionally facilitated SCO Unix to us but it was a PIA to install and configure, and lacked *lots* of driver support.
The interesting thing to us was that, while Xenix was an MS product, MS had a very hands off approach towards it. All customer relationships were handled by SCO. The only time I ever remember Bill G. saying something about it was when he was asked about branching NT away from OS/2 and whether he was afraid of losing market share to *nix. His reply (I'm paraphrasing): We have DOS, Windows, OS/2, Xenix, and NT. It's Microsoft against Microsoft against Microsoft against Microsoft.
OK, time to stop reminiscing. Have a great Saturday.
I first read the article on Sunday afternoon. It caught my attention because, like many on/., I made the right associations and tried to match "intelligence" with "open source" in the espionage sense. I was disappointed after reading 2/3 of the article, and didn't finish it. This was written by someone mostly grandstanding. The author focused too much on gathering data from all sources without giving enough thought to interpretation of those data.
I had the privilege (misfortune?) to work with a few intelligence types. When you talk to the people in the field, not to the public figures, public affairs wags, or the pundits, you will almost universally get the same two answers, rated in order of importance:
Intelligence analysis
Human level intelligence (HUMINT)
Fewer whiz-bang gadgets
The open intelligence article advocates only points 2 and 3, and barely touches on 1. Just like in coding, where the problem is not writing code but writing code that does something useful, intelligence is all about interpreting the data so that policy and actions may be appropriately channeled.
Dr. Ray S. Cline (former deputy director, CIA; look him up) once said that the world needed fewer spies and more critical thinking (I'm paraphrasing here a bit). Everyday disasters and attacks that could have been prevented still happen because there are too many toys and budgets and bureacratic fiefdoms to protect and there aren't enough ears who understand the bad guys' language, not enough cooperation between three-letter agencies, and not enough brains focused on making sense of the data gathered through various channels.
Thus, while part of the problem is gathering data, making sense of it is what will prevent another catastrophe like the terrorist attacks last September.
You let it slide?! Did you grade on a curve? Hope not because if you did you just the cheating little asshole screw over
another classmate or two (classmates who DIDN'T cheat).
No, I never graded on a curve. I taught mostly computer-related subjects (compilers, OS, languages, etc.). All my tests have the same structure:
One free-form question, regarding some theoretical aspect (i.e. define big endiand and little endian) - 20%
One question testing for knowledge (i.e. is this a valid Smalltalk code snipet: | x | x:= new Window. x title: "Hi"; open.) - 30%
One question defining an expected result (i.e. output from a program) where the student must write some code (or resolve an integrative when I taught math). I don't care how the student gets to the answer as long as the answer is correct - 50%
There were only eight possible grades with those questions, and you could pass the test only if the practical portion of the test was correct. The universities where I taught both had a 65% minimum grade for passing (we were on a 0-100% scale, not a letter scale).
The cheaters were funny because they tended to copy someone else's wrong answers. Also, I never graded a "partial" result, i.e. most of the code worked, so I'd give someone 35% of the result. Either they got the 20%, 30%, or 50% for each question, or zero.
By the way, these exams were normally done with a policy of open text books and notebooks. Some brought computers to the classroom. I was testing their knowledge and ability to sinthesize, not their ability to read.
As for cheating catching up with them later in life as an excuse for allowing cheating to slip by, what you did was
specifically teach an individual that lack of integrity and cheating CAN get you ahead. Perhaps we should allow lying to
slip by too, not call anyone on it?
First, I didn't teach them how to cheat. If I caught a person cheating without a doubt, she was busted. Second, I warned them against cheating. Having done that, I don't care if they cheat or not, just like I don't care if you or anyone else cheats on taxes or doesn't. Third, cheating always catches up with you. Look at the Enron mess. Look at President Clinton. In a smaller scale, I look at my students and see which ones were successful and which ones weren't, and I equate that with my experience when they were suspected of cheating. The software engineer turned web designer is a good example. Fourth: If I caught a cheater, beyond a doubt, I would nullify the test and tell the perpetrator(s) to return another day for a new test. I was in the business of teaching, not of busting cheaters.
Fifth: If I found something that I thought was cheating during grading, I would give the benefit of the doubt to the cheater if he or she had the right answer. It was funny when the cheaters copied the wrong answers.
Character training is about as important as picking up knowledge. We're not talking religious mumbo-jumbo character
training, we're talking generic, all-important, widely applicable character training supporting integrity, honesty, and
accepting blanket responsibility for one's actions. Letting violations slide by ignored rewards and reinforces such
behavior. We need MORE character training, not less, and certainly not laisse faire attitudes towards unacceptable
behavior.
I certainly do hope the little shit got his payback later...but I also hope that on the road to his payback s/he didn't screw
other innocents over.
I know first hand that she was hired in three occasions, then fired within 6 months for incompetence. That's when she switched careers. She may have gotten the job, but she certainly wasn't able to hold on to them. I like to think that the competitors for the same position moved on to finding work with other companies, companies that would have the insight to do a reality check on the candidates beyond just checking grades. Both the company and the candidates would be better off after they got the job.
That's all well and good...except for English Composition classes where the entire point is to write compositions as a means
of learning how to write. There is no other way to do it.
Then what about literature classes where you may be asked to expound upon some book or short story you've all read as
part of the assignment? This is an area ripe for cheating and cheaters need to be REAMED. Reamed long, hard, and deep.
Reamed with dry broomsticks.
There are simply some classes where the main means of learning and demonstrating learning is to write. They aren't going to
go away (and shouldn't).
Simple: Have your student write a 500-word essay in class from three or more topics related to the main subject. The student selects the topic from this menu. Writing a 500-word essay should take about 60-90 minutes.
Then again, when I was teaching and I suspected cheating, I usually let it slide. Cheating has a way of catching up with the cheater later in life. I know of a good example from one of my students, who passed (C+) a course by asking someone else to do her assignments for her. It was an advanced programming course. She was eaten alive when she went out to the real world and changed her career path from software engineer to web designer.
Disclaimer: During my career I've been a university professor and a corporate training in many occasions; my views are tempered by these experiences.
I don't advocate the use of turnitin.com or any other service in catching students "cheating" on their papers. When I was both a student I was taught that acquiring analytical and synthesis skills are the purposes of a university education. Based on that principle, my best teachers were the ones who based their grades on analysis, synthesis, or some measurable activity (hands-on project, test) rather than "a paper". I tried carrying forward with this tradition during my career.
I believe that a service like turnitin.com is an insult to both students and teachers. The students will always find a way to break the rules. The teachers will become lazy and complacent. The service is extremely easy to be defeated if you just use some common sense and some non-academic skills. Besides, grading a paper is a very subjective activity; what is excellent for one reader is rubbish for another (think moderation on/.).
One simple way of beating this service is to search the web for similar papers written in a different language, perhaps found on servers in other countries. If you were smart enough to learn at least one other language other than your native language, this opens a whole new WWW out there. A student who engages in a translation effort may find that (a) he will absorb some of the material in the process; and (b) will likely add his own spin to the paper.
I would advocate changing the teaching methods rather than resorting to a service like this. Reduce the emphasis on papers and increase it on teaching people how to think.
What the latter is
discussing are multiple images of Linux being hosted on top of a VM.
We tested running Linux in native mode and on top of VM on the z90. It was s-l-o-w anyway. By extension, running it in a VM partition would've made it slower.
My point is not to bash Linux; I like using it (and use it exclusively for 99% of my work, from notebooks to servers), but Linux just isn't ready for mission-critical applications running on mainframes. Sun is a lot closer to that goal.
For mission-critical stuff on mainframes, the kind of apps where you put your career on the line, MVS is still the way to go. Being a Linux chauvinist doesn't improve its performance or reliability on z90 hardware. I don't doubt it will get there; it just hasn't quite arrived yet.
I agree mostly with the article because I recently evaluated an IBM mainframe against an AIX SP2 and a Solaris 4-processor server. Most of the issues in the article, particularly performance, are right on.
The application we were testing was extremely processor and memory intensive. While there was a web component, the biggest problem was moving a large number of bitmaps in one format into the server, convert them from base 64 to a binary representation, rasterize them, and convert them to a "browser friendly" format such as JPEG, GIF, or PNG. We had to complete hundreds (> 200) of these operations per second.
I really wanted to use Linux because most of my staff is familiar with it and our customer felt warm and fuzzy about using IBM equipment. At the end of the day, however, the Linux mainframe only gave us 25% of the minimum speed that we needed for our process to be successful. IBM and a certain German Linux company tweaked everything they could but the performance wasn't there. The AIX vs. Solaris match was more evenly paired. My customer decided on Solaris because they offered a few advantages in Java tools that AIX didn't have. All vendor's boxes had equivalent processor and memory configurations.
I would like to spread the Linux credo as far and wide as possible. What we must understand is that, in order to make Linux a viable option in mission-critical applications (the kind of thing sitting on a mainframe), the performance and "hardening" of something like MVS must be present. Linux just isn't there yet.
Disclaimer: I'm under NDA so that's why some aspects of this posting are a bit vague. Drop me an email if you want more details regarding our experience but our conversation will be "off the record."
Can you get me one of those PocketPC? you know you want to:)
I have to return most of the hardware at some point to the vendors; however, establishing a partnership for software development with Compaq or Insignia or Sharp will probably result in free Palm stuff. Go after their apps development group and build something that will be sold under their brand and they'll facilitate the hardware. Occasionally you'll get to play with 'em prototypes too.
Free hardware usually arrives after you've developed and delivered a first version of whatever it is you're working on. By then they know you're serious. Oh, and pick a project that they really want. They'll throw the hardware at you because they know you'll be using it.
I've been using the full-size Palm keyboard for a year and it rocks. You can fold it to a footprint equivalent to the Palm V's (though about twice as thick) or open it to get a full notebook-size kbd. Very neat. I've written code, portions of business plans, email, etc. on this kbd. Kool!
I broke my little finger (left hand) about a year and a half ago and tried some of those mini-kbds (on my desktop workstations and with my Palm V) because I couldn't type. They were all very disappointing. That's why I bought other Palm kbd.
This i701 device looks like a great evolutionary step forward for Palm. The service options seem a bit overpriced but the device's form factor is about right. The older Palm VII was too large to lug around; might as well had taken the laptop.
A few other postings have comments on how much better the iPaq or some other Windows-based system is. I have the opportunity of getting my hands on both types of devices for *free* (as in beer) through the work I do and the Palm product still seems quite superior. Colour, the ability to playback MP3 files, and other bells and whistles make the Windows Pocket PCs much bulkier. Palm is still undisputably the vendor with the smallest form factor (Clié included). If I wear a suit, I can literally slip a Palm V/Vx/m50x in my shirt pocket without it bulking up. If I travel I can take the whole set up, including a modem and the portable keyboard, in a very small bag (sometimes I don't even take my laptop). Pocket PC devices are still bulkier and look like toys. Palms have a certain "business appearance" that appeals to business people. Walk into a company's board room with a Palm and nobody will raise an eyebrow. Do the same with a Pocket PC and you're looked at like you're a Martian.
One of the best features in this new Palm i701 seems to be the antenna. Remember that PDAs are about unobtrusiveness; the i701 addresses this fairly well. A colour screen would've been nice, but that would have a severe impact on the battery usage. I prefer longer air time and/or device battery life over pretty pictures. Besides, what graphical application demands a *small screen*?
A killer app that leverages the i701's form factor and Internet connectivity would be great. Think, think, think...
The Palm platform's software stability is significantly better than Windows CE's/Pocket PC. Development of Palm applications is much simpler than development for WinCE. In terms of usability, use both devices for a week and see which one you'll carry everywhere.
Remember that Palm devices are very good at being PDAs. Pocket PCs are very good at trying to pack the power of a PC in a small footprint. Like everything else, use the best tool for the job at hand.
I personally dont think they expect a
home user to pay the $600 for the software. In fact they probably dont mind piracy by the home user because it would
extends their user base.
You obviously don't know anybody who works for Adobe or have never crossed their path. They'll come down heavy on anyone whom they know for sure has a pirated copy of any of their packages. Even their employees are paranoid about their policies in terms of who they can give (as a gift) a licenced copy of the software they buy under employee plans.
Their decision to discontinue Asian support is, after all, theirs. It's their intellectual property and their investment. They should do as they see fit. This could be a great market opportunity for another company.
My programming team is considering making some sweeping changes to our code base (150+ perl
CGIs, over a meg of code)... What suggestions might readers have about tackling a large-scale retrofit?
My advise to successfully accomplish the changes:
Where possible, use Python or Java instead PERL
If there is a line-of-business piece of code (i.e. if your company's bread is on the line when this fails) make sure you can roll the original code back if the new version doesn't perform
Divide the programming team in groups of 2-4 people
Use XP techniques for development
Have an external group evaluate progress to keep people honest; this group is responsible for testing that functionality meets or exceeds that of the original system
I led the development and migration of some very large mission-critical systems in my career. Too many programmers making decisions on-the-fly, totally centralized management, or a "leave the technical folks alone until they're done" attitude are sure recipies for disaster.
Good luck with the changes.
Merry Christmas, and God bless us everyone!
E
Correction (PCP guy, volts and amps)
on
Christmas is Coming
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
From the "danger" article:
At that instant 16,600 volts shot through his body.
There is no way for 16,600 volts of electricity to shooth through anything, even copper wire. We are talking about amps at this point, i.e. the flow of electricity (coulombs/second) depending on the guy's resistance when he touched the other wire. Volts are a measure of "potential energy" not of current, which is what shot through this guy's body.
I wonder if PCP made him more conductive than the average person. After all, you can really say this guy was pretty wired...
Thanks for taking the time to answer this post. I don't believe I will have a chance to read the books before the movie opens but your answers will definitely help when it comes to following what's happening.
I will try to read the books over the Christmas holiday (I've got two weeks off).
I can see the development of archetypes in the descriptions you provided. I'm currently re-reading Joseph Campbell's Hero of a Thousand Faces and the same patterns and themes emerge in LOTR, Star Wars, Harry Potter, 2001, etc.
I don't know what these books and movies are about. Like almost anyone in the western world, I've seen the books and heard of the movies, but I have no idea about the plot other than what I gathered from the books' dust covers. I particularly don't understand how these fantasies are more appealing than Star Wars, Conan the Barbarian, or the Beastmaster. The story line I've read hasn't compelled me to buy the books yet. What am I missing?
Friends of mine in central Russia gather once a month to enact scenes from LOTR; they have armours, swords, and other paraphernalia. I've seen some photos they took and it looks like a great role-playing game.
What surprised me most was that my girlfriend is a photography/modeling student, with zero geek quotient, and yet she's made me promise to take her to see LOTR on opening night (she hasn't read the books either). There is some deeper cultural phenomenon here that escapes me, and I would appreciate a quick intro from someone here on/. who is knowledgeable on LOTR.
Profile: My fantasy diet includes Star Wars, Harry Potter, Matrix, and all kinds of Gothic literature (from Carmilla to Sonja Blue). I deeply dislike Star Trek because it isn't good fantasy or good, hard sci-fi; it's something sort of middle of the road. My SciFi tastes include Arthur C. Clarke, Phillip K. Dick, Ursula LeGine (sp?), Harlan Ellison, Robert Heinlein, Elizabeth Moon, Melissa Scott, Neal Stephenson, etc.
A couple of posters asked this question above: How do we reconcile XP short develop/test cycles with a fixed project plan + bid?
The answer is simple: During the planning and estimate parts we focus on defining the problem domain and a set of solutions for it. We don't focus on too many implementation details.
XP techniques are applied to solving each specific problem found in the requirements. For example, the problem may be something like "how do we decode this math-intensive file the fastest?". There usually are two or more answers to such a problem. First we define an interface, then we try two parallel, different solutions and try both. The one that meets that criteria best wins, and we move on to the next problem.
The thirst for features suffered by some people is often the result of poor design choices in the beginning of the project. If additional features are required, and the analysis was done correctly, you'll find that these new features simply extend solutions you were already working on (or solved). Thus, XP comes to the rescue again by letting you add the new feature without throwing the schedule out the window. Think about it: If a new feature forces someone to re-write a whole system then something must've been overlooked during the requirements analysis phase.
The most important part of this process is not to start coding and testing until the business requirements are clearly defined. We've been guilty in the past of coding before understanding the problem completely; we try to avoid that trap now. That is probably the single most relevant cause of software project delays.
My company develops turn-key systems. Sometimes we also develop custom solutions for our customers. Our customer base has increased steadily after the dotcom crash, when we switched from products to services. One of the reasons our customers like us is that we don't bill projects by the hour. We will the project on a fixed price, not to exceed, basis.
The programmers who work with us on a contract basis don't bill us by the hour either. After we have the design and we distribute tasks and prior to submitting the final estimate, we ask contractors to place a fixed bid.
We've done six major projects like this since March, and in all cases we finished within budget and on-schedule, and the systems are currently in production. They are all mission-critical systems running in either robotics environments or high-availability networks.
Our economic motivation is then to do things well and quickly in order to increase our profits. That also enables us to move on to the next project faster than slaving over some customer in order to bill the maximum hours.
As far as development techniques go, we adopted XP earlier on and it's working for us.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know what kind of programmer you're refering to. It took me five years to get my degree in Computer Engineering, plus a lot more time of ongoing education since I graduated in 1990. That was an extra five years after getting my associate degree.
I actually have very little respect for doctors' attitude that 'we save lives'. So do I when I design control systems running heavy machinery, or avionics, or run an industrial plant, or whatever. Like any other profession, medicine is full of people who aren't as capable as others. The problem I see with doctors is that they all want us to believe that they're 'hollier than thou'. I don't accept that. If a doctor fucks up, a patient dies. If an avionics software engineer fucks up, a couple of hundred people die.
If the state of the medical profession, HMOs, drug manufacturers, and other health services in the United States is any indication, I'd much rather be an unlicensed software engineer than an "ethical" doctor. Why is it that medicines and medical attention cost as much as ten times as what they cost in other countries?
As for the cool technologies OSS has today, keep in mind that a great majority of them are re-implementations of software developed privately or under a university grant. Somebody did the research and h4x0rs re-implemented it. I support OSS (and not GPL'd, by the way; other licences like BSD are more to my liking but that's me), so don't go flaming me for this comment. A h4x0r != software engineer, though often a software engineer is also a h4x0r. People forget (even on /.) that coding is only the smallest part of the profession. System design, knowing how to analyze and apply the correct algorithms, understanding the OS (or how to build one), the compilers (or how to build them), and so on are as valuable as coding. I met many h4x0rs, even employed software "professionals" who don't have a clue of how to code something as simple as a Quick Sort.
Last time I checked, there are all kinds of charlatans developing 'miracle cures' and diets and what have you that, in the end, try to pass for members of the health industry. Turn midnight TV on and see for yourself.
Cheers!
EGreetings,
I had a Casio G Shock watch for a few years that does everything this one does, with barometer/altimeter, compass, etc. plus a few other functions that this one lacks. It cost about $120 five years ago and works *great*. The altimeter/barometer is accurate to 10,000 ft/agl (I tested often; I'm a skydiver). The compass is very accurate.
The watch itself is all digital, with an LCD instead of hands. You can probably find it cheaper on eBay than what I paid for it.
Just a thought.
E
I deployed a number of Xenix installations in the mid- to late 1980's, the last one in either 1989 or 1990. We were competing against Novell Netware networks (back when TeleVideo made that hideous Novell dedicated hardware with the 286 and the Z-80 and all the way to the IBM PS/2 model 80 days) and usually beat them hands down for an inventory and POS application. Our customers were medium-size enterprises (up to 200 employees, up to five physical locations). The configuration:
The advantages of using this:
NCR *nix, Xenix, Minix, and AIX 3.0 were the first *nix OSs I was involved with, back in 1985 and forward. I went from Apple's Applesoft/ProDOS/MacOS/UCSD Pascal to *nix, then to Microsoft's world.
All in all, I remember Xenix being one of the most complete *nix environments I played with. Only AIX running on RS/6000 (I was working on them prior to the announcement in March 1990) was more complete in its blend of SV and BSD tools. SCO occasionally facilitated SCO Unix to us but it was a PIA to install and configure, and lacked *lots* of driver support.
The interesting thing to us was that, while Xenix was an MS product, MS had a very hands off approach towards it. All customer relationships were handled by SCO. The only time I ever remember Bill G. saying something about it was when he was asked about branching NT away from OS/2 and whether he was afraid of losing market share to *nix. His reply (I'm paraphrasing): We have DOS, Windows, OS/2, Xenix, and NT. It's Microsoft against Microsoft against Microsoft against Microsoft.
OK, time to stop reminiscing. Have a great Saturday.
EGreetings,
I finally turned the AOTC mirror off. Only the people who are currently downloading the file (it's 1900 PST on Tuesday) have access to it.
Thanks for helping us stress test the lines; now we know for sure what our effective bandwidth is.
Cheers!
E
We need the bandwidth to get back to work. I'm sure you can find another mirror elsewhere.
Cheers!
E
Greetings!
You may download the trailer from: http://lavender.cime.net/~aotc/ep2_clone_war.mpg
I got it from Drestin (thanks, Dude!)
Cheers,
E
Damn, that's why my editor gets so frustrated with me...
EI first read the article on Sunday afternoon. It caught my attention because, like many on /., I made the right associations and tried to match "intelligence" with "open source" in the espionage sense. I was disappointed after reading 2/3 of the article, and didn't finish it. This was written by someone mostly grandstanding. The author focused too much on gathering data from all sources without giving enough thought to interpretation of those data.
I had the privilege (misfortune?) to work with a few intelligence types. When you talk to the people in the field, not to the public figures, public affairs wags, or the pundits, you will almost universally get the same two answers, rated in order of importance:
The open intelligence article advocates only points 2 and 3, and barely touches on 1. Just like in coding, where the problem is not writing code but writing code that does something useful, intelligence is all about interpreting the data so that policy and actions may be appropriately channeled.
Dr. Ray S. Cline (former deputy director, CIA; look him up) once said that the world needed fewer spies and more critical thinking (I'm paraphrasing here a bit). Everyday disasters and attacks that could have been prevented still happen because there are too many toys and budgets and bureacratic fiefdoms to protect and there aren't enough ears who understand the bad guys' language, not enough cooperation between three-letter agencies, and not enough brains focused on making sense of the data gathered through various channels.
Thus, while part of the problem is gathering data, making sense of it is what will prevent another catastrophe like the terrorist attacks last September.
Epraedor wrote:
You let it slide?! Did you grade on a curve? Hope not because if you did you just the cheating little asshole screw over another classmate or two (classmates who DIDN'T cheat).
No, I never graded on a curve. I taught mostly computer-related subjects (compilers, OS, languages, etc.). All my tests have the same structure:
There were only eight possible grades with those questions, and you could pass the test only if the practical portion of the test was correct. The universities where I taught both had a 65% minimum grade for passing (we were on a 0-100% scale, not a letter scale).
The cheaters were funny because they tended to copy someone else's wrong answers. Also, I never graded a "partial" result, i.e. most of the code worked, so I'd give someone 35% of the result. Either they got the 20%, 30%, or 50% for each question, or zero.
By the way, these exams were normally done with a policy of open text books and notebooks. Some brought computers to the classroom. I was testing their knowledge and ability to sinthesize, not their ability to read.
As for cheating catching up with them later in life as an excuse for allowing cheating to slip by, what you did was specifically teach an individual that lack of integrity and cheating CAN get you ahead. Perhaps we should allow lying to slip by too, not call anyone on it?
First, I didn't teach them how to cheat. If I caught a person cheating without a doubt, she was busted. Second, I warned them against cheating. Having done that, I don't care if they cheat or not, just like I don't care if you or anyone else cheats on taxes or doesn't. Third, cheating always catches up with you. Look at the Enron mess. Look at President Clinton. In a smaller scale, I look at my students and see which ones were successful and which ones weren't, and I equate that with my experience when they were suspected of cheating. The software engineer turned web designer is a good example. Fourth: If I caught a cheater, beyond a doubt, I would nullify the test and tell the perpetrator(s) to return another day for a new test. I was in the business of teaching, not of busting cheaters. Fifth: If I found something that I thought was cheating during grading, I would give the benefit of the doubt to the cheater if he or she had the right answer. It was funny when the cheaters copied the wrong answers.
Character training is about as important as picking up knowledge. We're not talking religious mumbo-jumbo character training, we're talking generic, all-important, widely applicable character training supporting integrity, honesty, and accepting blanket responsibility for one's actions. Letting violations slide by ignored rewards and reinforces such behavior. We need MORE character training, not less, and certainly not laisse faire attitudes towards unacceptable behavior.
I certainly do hope the little shit got his payback later...but I also hope that on the road to his payback s/he didn't screw other innocents over.
I know first hand that she was hired in three occasions, then fired within 6 months for incompetence. That's when she switched careers. She may have gotten the job, but she certainly wasn't able to hold on to them. I like to think that the competitors for the same position moved on to finding work with other companies, companies that would have the insight to do a reality check on the candidates beyond just checking grades. Both the company and the candidates would be better off after they got the job.
Cheers,
Epraedor wrote:
That's all well and good...except for English Composition classes where the entire point is to write compositions as a means
of learning how to write. There is no other way to do it.
Then what about literature classes where you may be asked to expound upon some book or short story you've all read as
part of the assignment? This is an area ripe for cheating and cheaters need to be REAMED. Reamed long, hard, and deep.
Reamed with dry broomsticks.
There are simply some classes where the main means of learning and demonstrating learning is to write. They aren't going to
go away (and shouldn't).
Simple: Have your student write a 500-word essay in class from three or more topics related to the main subject. The student selects the topic from this menu. Writing a 500-word essay should take about 60-90 minutes.
Then again, when I was teaching and I suspected cheating, I usually let it slide. Cheating has a way of catching up with the cheater later in life. I know of a good example from one of my students, who passed (C+) a course by asking someone else to do her assignments for her. It was an advanced programming course. She was eaten alive when she went out to the real world and changed her career path from software engineer to web designer.
Cheers,
E
Disclaimer: During my career I've been a university professor and a corporate training in many occasions; my views are tempered by these experiences.
I don't advocate the use of turnitin.com or any other service in catching students "cheating" on their papers. When I was both a student I was taught that acquiring analytical and synthesis skills are the purposes of a university education. Based on that principle, my best teachers were the ones who based their grades on analysis, synthesis, or some measurable activity (hands-on project, test) rather than "a paper". I tried carrying forward with this tradition during my career.
I believe that a service like turnitin.com is an insult to both students and teachers. The students will always find a way to break the rules. The teachers will become lazy and complacent. The service is extremely easy to be defeated if you just use some common sense and some non-academic skills. Besides, grading a paper is a very subjective activity; what is excellent for one reader is rubbish for another (think moderation on /.).
One simple way of beating this service is to search the web for similar papers written in a different language, perhaps found on servers in other countries. If you were smart enough to learn at least one other language other than your native language, this opens a whole new WWW out there. A student who engages in a translation effort may find that (a) he will absorb some of the material in the process; and (b) will likely add his own spin to the paper.
I would advocate changing the teaching methods rather than resorting to a service like this. Reduce the emphasis on papers and increase it on teaching people how to think.
Flame on,
Ecrush wrote:
What the latter is discussing are multiple images of Linux being hosted on top of a VM.
We tested running Linux in native mode and on top of VM on the z90. It was s-l-o-w anyway. By extension, running it in a VM partition would've made it slower.
My point is not to bash Linux; I like using it (and use it exclusively for 99% of my work, from notebooks to servers), but Linux just isn't ready for mission-critical applications running on mainframes. Sun is a lot closer to that goal.
For mission-critical stuff on mainframes, the kind of apps where you put your career on the line, MVS is still the way to go. Being a Linux chauvinist doesn't improve its performance or reliability on z90 hardware. I don't doubt it will get there; it just hasn't quite arrived yet.
Cheers,
EI agree mostly with the article because I recently evaluated an IBM mainframe against an AIX SP2 and a Solaris 4-processor server. Most of the issues in the article, particularly performance, are right on.
The application we were testing was extremely processor and memory intensive. While there was a web component, the biggest problem was moving a large number of bitmaps in one format into the server, convert them from base 64 to a binary representation, rasterize them, and convert them to a "browser friendly" format such as JPEG, GIF, or PNG. We had to complete hundreds (> 200) of these operations per second.
I really wanted to use Linux because most of my staff is familiar with it and our customer felt warm and fuzzy about using IBM equipment. At the end of the day, however, the Linux mainframe only gave us 25% of the minimum speed that we needed for our process to be successful. IBM and a certain German Linux company tweaked everything they could but the performance wasn't there. The AIX vs. Solaris match was more evenly paired. My customer decided on Solaris because they offered a few advantages in Java tools that AIX didn't have. All vendor's boxes had equivalent processor and memory configurations.
I would like to spread the Linux credo as far and wide as possible. What we must understand is that, in order to make Linux a viable option in mission-critical applications (the kind of thing sitting on a mainframe), the performance and "hardening" of something like MVS must be present. Linux just isn't there yet.
Disclaimer: I'm under NDA so that's why some aspects of this posting are a bit vague. Drop me an email if you want more details regarding our experience but our conversation will be "off the record."
Have a nice wknd,
Ekawaichan wrote:
Can you get me one of those PocketPC? you know you want to :)
I have to return most of the hardware at some point to the vendors; however, establishing a partnership for software development with Compaq or Insignia or Sharp will probably result in free Palm stuff. Go after their apps development group and build something that will be sold under their brand and they'll facilitate the hardware. Occasionally you'll get to play with 'em prototypes too.
Free hardware usually arrives after you've developed and delivered a first version of whatever it is you're working on. By then they know you're serious. Oh, and pick a project that they really want. They'll throw the hardware at you because they know you'll be using it.
Cheers!
EGreetings,
I've been using the full-size Palm keyboard for a year and it rocks. You can fold it to a footprint equivalent to the Palm V's (though about twice as thick) or open it to get a full notebook-size kbd. Very neat. I've written code, portions of business plans, email, etc. on this kbd. Kool!
I broke my little finger (left hand) about a year and a half ago and tried some of those mini-kbds (on my desktop workstations and with my Palm V) because I couldn't type. They were all very disappointing. That's why I bought other Palm kbd.
Cheers!
EThis i701 device looks like a great evolutionary step forward for Palm. The service options seem a bit overpriced but the device's form factor is about right. The older Palm VII was too large to lug around; might as well had taken the laptop.
A few other postings have comments on how much better the iPaq or some other Windows-based system is. I have the opportunity of getting my hands on both types of devices for *free* (as in beer) through the work I do and the Palm product still seems quite superior. Colour, the ability to playback MP3 files, and other bells and whistles make the Windows Pocket PCs much bulkier. Palm is still undisputably the vendor with the smallest form factor (Clié included). If I wear a suit, I can literally slip a Palm V/Vx/m50x in my shirt pocket without it bulking up. If I travel I can take the whole set up, including a modem and the portable keyboard, in a very small bag (sometimes I don't even take my laptop). Pocket PC devices are still bulkier and look like toys. Palms have a certain "business appearance" that appeals to business people. Walk into a company's board room with a Palm and nobody will raise an eyebrow. Do the same with a Pocket PC and you're looked at like you're a Martian.
One of the best features in this new Palm i701 seems to be the antenna. Remember that PDAs are about unobtrusiveness; the i701 addresses this fairly well. A colour screen would've been nice, but that would have a severe impact on the battery usage. I prefer longer air time and/or device battery life over pretty pictures. Besides, what graphical application demands a *small screen*?
A killer app that leverages the i701's form factor and Internet connectivity would be great. Think, think, think...
The Palm platform's software stability is significantly better than Windows CE's/Pocket PC. Development of Palm applications is much simpler than development for WinCE. In terms of usability, use both devices for a week and see which one you'll carry everywhere.
Remember that Palm devices are very good at being PDAs. Pocket PCs are very good at trying to pack the power of a PC in a small footprint. Like everything else, use the best tool for the job at hand.
Cheers!
EI personally dont think they expect a home user to pay the $600 for the software. In fact they probably dont mind piracy by the home user because it would extends their user base.
You obviously don't know anybody who works for Adobe or have never crossed their path. They'll come down heavy on anyone whom they know for sure has a pirated copy of any of their packages. Even their employees are paranoid about their policies in terms of who they can give (as a gift) a licenced copy of the software they buy under employee plans.
Their decision to discontinue Asian support is, after all, theirs. It's their intellectual property and their investment. They should do as they see fit. This could be a great market opportunity for another company.
Cheers!
EGreetings!
I just logged on to KaZaA, did a search on 'Spears' and lots of images, MP3s, videos, etc. are available for download. Could someone please explain?
Thanks,
Echizor wrote:
My programming team is considering making some sweeping changes to our code base (150+ perl CGIs, over a meg of code)... What suggestions might readers have about tackling a large-scale retrofit?
My advise to successfully accomplish the changes:
I led the development and migration of some very large mission-critical systems in my career. Too many programmers making decisions on-the-fly, totally centralized management, or a "leave the technical folks alone until they're done" attitude are sure recipies for disaster.
Good luck with the changes.
Merry Christmas, and God bless us everyone!
E
From the "danger" article:
At that instant 16,600 volts shot through his body.
There is no way for 16,600 volts of electricity to shooth through anything, even copper wire. We are talking about amps at this point, i.e. the flow of electricity (coulombs/second) depending on the guy's resistance when he touched the other wire. Volts are a measure of "potential energy" not of current, which is what shot through this guy's body.
I wonder if PCP made him more conductive than the average person. After all, you can really say this guy was pretty wired...
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all!
E
Greetings again,
Thanks for taking the time to answer this post. I don't believe I will have a chance to read the books before the movie opens but your answers will definitely help when it comes to following what's happening.
I will try to read the books over the Christmas holiday (I've got two weeks off).
I can see the development of archetypes in the descriptions you provided. I'm currently re-reading Joseph Campbell's Hero of a Thousand Faces and the same patterns and themes emerge in LOTR, Star Wars, Harry Potter, 2001, etc.
Best wishes,
E
Greetings!
I don't know what these books and movies are about. Like almost anyone in the western world, I've seen the books and heard of the movies, but I have no idea about the plot other than what I gathered from the books' dust covers. I particularly don't understand how these fantasies are more appealing than Star Wars, Conan the Barbarian, or the Beastmaster. The story line I've read hasn't compelled me to buy the books yet. What am I missing?
Friends of mine in central Russia gather once a month to enact scenes from LOTR; they have armours, swords, and other paraphernalia. I've seen some photos they took and it looks like a great role-playing game.
What surprised me most was that my girlfriend is a photography/modeling student, with zero geek quotient, and yet she's made me promise to take her to see LOTR on opening night (she hasn't read the books either). There is some deeper cultural phenomenon here that escapes me, and I would appreciate a quick intro from someone here on /. who is knowledgeable on LOTR.
Profile: My fantasy diet includes Star Wars, Harry Potter, Matrix, and all kinds of Gothic literature (from Carmilla to Sonja Blue). I deeply dislike Star Trek because it isn't good fantasy or good, hard sci-fi; it's something sort of middle of the road. My SciFi tastes include Arthur C. Clarke, Phillip K. Dick, Ursula LeGine (sp?), Harlan Ellison, Robert Heinlein, Elizabeth Moon, Melissa Scott, Neal Stephenson, etc.
Thanks in advance,
EA couple of posters asked this question above: How do we reconcile XP short develop/test cycles with a fixed project plan + bid?
The answer is simple: During the planning and estimate parts we focus on defining the problem domain and a set of solutions for it. We don't focus on too many implementation details.
XP techniques are applied to solving each specific problem found in the requirements. For example, the problem may be something like "how do we decode this math-intensive file the fastest?". There usually are two or more answers to such a problem. First we define an interface, then we try two parallel, different solutions and try both. The one that meets that criteria best wins, and we move on to the next problem.
The thirst for features suffered by some people is often the result of poor design choices in the beginning of the project. If additional features are required, and the analysis was done correctly, you'll find that these new features simply extend solutions you were already working on (or solved). Thus, XP comes to the rescue again by letting you add the new feature without throwing the schedule out the window. Think about it: If a new feature forces someone to re-write a whole system then something must've been overlooked during the requirements analysis phase.
The most important part of this process is not to start coding and testing until the business requirements are clearly defined. We've been guilty in the past of coding before understanding the problem completely; we try to avoid that trap now. That is probably the single most relevant cause of software project delays.
Cheers!
EMy company develops turn-key systems. Sometimes we also develop custom solutions for our customers. Our customer base has increased steadily after the dotcom crash, when we switched from products to services. One of the reasons our customers like us is that we don't bill projects by the hour. We will the project on a fixed price, not to exceed, basis.
The programmers who work with us on a contract basis don't bill us by the hour either. After we have the design and we distribute tasks and prior to submitting the final estimate, we ask contractors to place a fixed bid.
We've done six major projects like this since March, and in all cases we finished within budget and on-schedule, and the systems are currently in production. They are all mission-critical systems running in either robotics environments or high-availability networks.
Our economic motivation is then to do things well and quickly in order to increase our profits. That also enables us to move on to the next project faster than slaving over some customer in order to bill the maximum hours.
As far as development techniques go, we adopted XP earlier on and it's working for us.
Cheers!
EOne-time pads + encryption du jour.
See Applied Cryptography 2nd ed. pp. 227-229 "Hiding Cyphertext in Cyphertext" and "Destroying Information"
E
E