It helps if you understand the difference between a const, a const reference/pointer, a const reference/pointer to a const, a (non-const) reference to a const, etc., etc., etc.
A good start is to read Humpty Dumpty in Lewis Carroll's Alice.
At the end of the experiment, the computer then proceeded to place an order for 50,000 Trump for President bumper stickers and began singing the theme from "Gilligan's Island". Repeatedly.
There are only a very small number of 1-percenters (Obviously). The bulk of the hair stylers and manicurists presently in the field are among the lowest-paid workers in the economy. And you're seriously expecting that to improve if a bunch up redundant people flood in from extinct trades?
We are looking to history. And historically, things weren't so great for the merely skilled and talented, much less the 99-percent of less capable people. Bach's Brandenberg Concertoes were written "on spec" in the hopes he'd get a job (he didn't). Mozart was essentially a government employee, paid about what a decent software engineer would make.
I agree. There's plenty of room for craftsmanship and artistry for those who want furniture that's made of something better than chipboard and paintings that didn't come from a printing press. But dumping a whole lot of unemployed people out there isn't going to single-handedly create a demand,, only a supply. The 99% will be less capable of buying premium when they're unemployed, not more.
There's nothing wrong with bringing back newspaper vendors, shoe-shiners, chauffeurs and maids, but unlike previous centuries, these would no longer be people performing an essential service. Not when there's online news, self-driving cars, and Roombas for those who don't care about prestige or who care about saving money more (and some of the most dedicated Wal-Mart customers are 1-percenters). So you can expect the elite to hire their lackeys selectively, not in bulk.
And incidentally, some dentists, vets, pharmacists and other less-glamorous medical trades can make very respectable livings. Whereas a lot of GPs have lower incomes than you think. Especially after liability insurance.
Any time you have 2 separate curves such as efficiency reducing jobs and efficiency creating jobs, there's always the chance that they'll intersect. The question then becomes not IF, but WHEN. Past Performance does not Guarantee Future Results, as they say on Wall Street.
The difference between the 40-year old books and today is that in the 40-year old books the assertion that increased efficiency could cost jobs was a prediction.
Today, there are not yet hordes of people on the street, but there's precious little job security and a lot of people are spending their days underemployed, unemployed, and/or working at jobs paying significantly less than they were used to. That last is perhaps the biggest difference between today and 40 years ago. Back then, if you were Bob Cratchitt and you lost your job doing ledgers, you might be able to retrain as a computer programmer and make more money than you ever did keeping books. These days, if you're a computer programmer, you're likely to have to retrain as a pizza delivery person. And the writing is on the wall even there, as eventually it's likely that automated pizza delivery will be widespread.
This can change of course. All that's required is for some need to arise that requires more/better-paid people to support these new efficiencies the way that computer jobs once did. So far, however, no one seems to have come up with a viable alternative, and in the mean time, even more professions/trades are being eroded. And since repairing robots is itself a largely automatable skill and since designing robots isn't so far demanding the number of people as programming computers did, that particular option isn't looking very encouraging.
Hmmm, yes. And you could program them to "accidentally" pass by the promo displays.
Of course, automated shoppers is just part 1. Expect part 2 to be automated stockers. Followed by container bays so that all the automated Wall-Mart trucks have to do is back up the their assigned aisle in the store dock.
In the end, all that will be left are the greeters and the security guards.
"Best selling" on Unix/Linux, however, is deceptive. These days a lot of the most popular programs for those platforms are free and open-source. Libre/OpenOffice, for example.
It is why the micro computer revolution destroyed IBM.
Ironic, considering IBM's role in creating a massively popular microcomputing platform.
But they didn't. Microcomputing was doing just fine before IBM entered the market. What IBM did was put the stamp of "business respectability" on microcomputing. Because back then a Data Processing PHB could have a complete lobotomy and still prosper because IBM would tell him what to do.
You do realize that the point Schmidt was making was that we spend too much effort obsessing over "isms" and not enough over actually doing constructive things?
Because the term "perma-temping" came into usage circa 1984 when mass layoffs became part of the business model.
From my own experience, prior to that era, even some manifestly incompetent co-employees had no trouble hanging onto jobs. We had one employee who didn't show up for work for 3 weeks before management decided that he should be officially terminated. The competent ones were leaving voluntarily, but in my field it was a given that you were more likely to get a raise by walking down the street than by working hard. So they'd leave individually on their own schedule.
After that epoch, laying off entire teams en masse was what I saw happening routinely to the point where locally it became a bitter adage that if you were a temp employee, you could expect your job to last 2 years, but if you were a "permanent" employee, it might last for 3.
And one day, if every company in America follows suit, then the following consecutive year the entire thing will implode.
Because once everyone has trained their offshore replacement, no one will be able to afford their insurance.
Not that the fat cats will care. They'll take their golden parachutes and bail, because only in Corporate America can you be paid more for being an abject failure as a top-level executive than a successful line worker could have made in a lifetime. If said worker weren't laid off first, of course.
Well, I got a panicky phone call once from a fried whose Windows system updated and it booted just fine. Then it rebooted. And rebooted. And rebooted....
Statistically speaking that evens out, wouldn't you say?
Well, I haven't been digging around in that part of the system much lately, but as I understand it, systemd has pretty well taken over the udev process (like so many other things). So there's a fairly high probability that systemd is at least part of the problem.
Even if systemd itself isn't driving udev abnormally, there's still the question to be answered of whether systemd is aiding or hindering the diagnostic and repair processes.
And those are VERY significant to me. One reason I liked Linux better than OS/2 was because despite working in a major IBM shop, when I had problems with OS/2, neither IBM nor third parties provided much in the way of problem resolution (Thomas Watson probably spun out in his grave long ago). Linux, on the other hand, had fairly detailed logs and diagnostics despite not having any Fortune Corporations backing it at the time.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if you don't like Net Neutrality, you're free to set up your own Internet.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day.
Sell a man a book, app, or online video and he'll enjoy it until you recall it, turn it off or abandon it.
It helps if you understand the difference between a const, a const reference/pointer, a const reference/pointer to a const, a (non-const) reference to a const, etc., etc., etc.
A good start is to read Humpty Dumpty in Lewis Carroll's Alice.
#define spam const
#define wonderful
spam *spam SPAM wonderful wonderful ...
At the end of the experiment, the computer then proceeded to place an order for 50,000 Trump for President bumper stickers and began singing the theme from "Gilligan's Island". Repeatedly.
Never mind that. What will it do for our quarterly profit figures?
What's wrong with a little honest profit?
Are you some kind of commie socialist wacko or something?
The original Nook had the ability to play music while you were reading.
It was a convenient way to drown out distractions.
There are only a very small number of 1-percenters (Obviously). The bulk of the hair stylers and manicurists presently in the field are among the lowest-paid workers in the economy. And you're seriously expecting that to improve if a bunch up redundant people flood in from extinct trades?
We are looking to history. And historically, things weren't so great for the merely skilled and talented, much less the 99-percent of less capable people. Bach's Brandenberg Concertoes were written "on spec" in the hopes he'd get a job (he didn't). Mozart was essentially a government employee, paid about what a decent software engineer would make.
I agree. There's plenty of room for craftsmanship and artistry for those who want furniture that's made of something better than chipboard and paintings that didn't come from a printing press. But dumping a whole lot of unemployed people out there isn't going to single-handedly create a demand,, only a supply. The 99% will be less capable of buying premium when they're unemployed, not more.
There's nothing wrong with bringing back newspaper vendors, shoe-shiners, chauffeurs and maids, but unlike previous centuries, these would no longer be people performing an essential service. Not when there's online news, self-driving cars, and Roombas for those who don't care about prestige or who care about saving money more (and some of the most dedicated Wal-Mart customers are 1-percenters). So you can expect the elite to hire their lackeys selectively, not in bulk.
And incidentally, some dentists, vets, pharmacists and other less-glamorous medical trades can make very respectable livings. Whereas a lot of GPs have lower incomes than you think. Especially after liability insurance.
Any time you have 2 separate curves such as efficiency reducing jobs and efficiency creating jobs, there's always the chance that they'll intersect. The question then becomes not IF, but WHEN. Past Performance does not Guarantee Future Results, as they say on Wall Street.
The difference between the 40-year old books and today is that in the 40-year old books the assertion that increased efficiency could cost jobs was a prediction.
Today, there are not yet hordes of people on the street, but there's precious little job security and a lot of people are spending their days underemployed, unemployed, and/or working at jobs paying significantly less than they were used to. That last is perhaps the biggest difference between today and 40 years ago. Back then, if you were Bob Cratchitt and you lost your job doing ledgers, you might be able to retrain as a computer programmer and make more money than you ever did keeping books. These days, if you're a computer programmer, you're likely to have to retrain as a pizza delivery person. And the writing is on the wall even there, as eventually it's likely that automated pizza delivery will be widespread.
This can change of course. All that's required is for some need to arise that requires more/better-paid people to support these new efficiencies the way that computer jobs once did. So far, however, no one seems to have come up with a viable alternative, and in the mean time, even more professions/trades are being eroded. And since repairing robots is itself a largely automatable skill and since designing robots isn't so far demanding the number of people as programming computers did, that particular option isn't looking very encouraging.
Hmmm, yes. And you could program them to "accidentally" pass by the promo displays.
Of course, automated shoppers is just part 1. Expect part 2 to be automated stockers. Followed by container bays so that all the automated Wall-Mart trucks have to do is back up the their assigned aisle in the store dock.
In the end, all that will be left are the greeters and the security guards.
Can ./ handle "latté"?
And it's time to bring back the venerable old "thorn" to English, dammit!
I thought they called that Napalm.
Next time they skip UPS and deliver by Amazon drone.
What could possibly go wrong?
"Best selling" on Unix/Linux, however, is deceptive. These days a lot of the most popular programs for those platforms are free and open-source. Libre/OpenOffice, for example.
It is why the micro computer revolution destroyed IBM.
Ironic, considering IBM's role in creating a massively popular microcomputing platform.
But they didn't. Microcomputing was doing just fine before IBM entered the market. What IBM did was put the stamp of "business respectability" on microcomputing. Because back then a Data Processing PHB could have a complete lobotomy and still prosper because IBM would tell him what to do.
We don't normally say please and thank you to the food dispensers
"Tea, Earl Grey, hot."
Dispenser sighs. "Yes, I know, Captain Picard. You ALWAYS order your tea Earl Grey and hot".
You do realize that the point Schmidt was making was that we spend too much effort obsessing over "isms" and not enough over actually doing constructive things?
It's going to take a breakthrough in quantum computing before they can get one to honk its horn microseconds before the light turns green.
You have statistics?
Because the term "perma-temping" came into usage circa 1984 when mass layoffs became part of the business model.
From my own experience, prior to that era, even some manifestly incompetent co-employees had no trouble hanging onto jobs. We had one employee who didn't show up for work for 3 weeks before management decided that he should be officially terminated. The competent ones were leaving voluntarily, but in my field it was a given that you were more likely to get a raise by walking down the street than by working hard. So they'd leave individually on their own schedule.
After that epoch, laying off entire teams en masse was what I saw happening routinely to the point where locally it became a bitter adage that if you were a temp employee, you could expect your job to last 2 years, but if you were a "permanent" employee, it might last for 3.
And one day, if every company in America follows suit, then the following consecutive year the entire thing will implode.
Because once everyone has trained their offshore replacement, no one will be able to afford their insurance.
Not that the fat cats will care. They'll take their golden parachutes and bail, because only in Corporate America can you be paid more for being an abject failure as a top-level executive than a successful line worker could have made in a lifetime. If said worker weren't laid off first, of course.
The worst thing you can do at a megacorp is doing exactly what your job description requires.
Which, ironically, is the cultural norm for a lot of Asians.
I know one who goes into panic attacks when tasked to think for himself instead of doing exactly what the boss says.
Good luck with that.
Well, I got a panicky phone call once from a fried whose Windows system updated and it booted just fine. Then it rebooted. And rebooted. And rebooted....
Statistically speaking that evens out, wouldn't you say?
Well, I haven't been digging around in that part of the system much lately, but as I understand it, systemd has pretty well taken over the udev process (like so many other things). So there's a fairly high probability that systemd is at least part of the problem.
Even if systemd itself isn't driving udev abnormally, there's still the question to be answered of whether systemd is aiding or hindering the diagnostic and repair processes.
And those are VERY significant to me. One reason I liked Linux better than OS/2 was because despite working in a major IBM shop, when I had problems with OS/2, neither IBM nor third parties provided much in the way of problem resolution (Thomas Watson probably spun out in his grave long ago). Linux, on the other hand, had fairly detailed logs and diagnostics despite not having any Fortune Corporations backing it at the time.
He should have just filed a complaint under the DMCA. Can't have people stealing Intellectual Property, after all!