There is a fine line between speeding and reckless endangerment.
My speeding through the Northern California desert at 95 (at the least) mph does not endanger anyone. The roads are wide and flat and straight. I may be hustling along, but no one is in danger of me, primarily because no one else is around.
Now take the idiot who is ducking in and out of traffic at 50mph. No turn signals, crossing multiple lanes of traffic, tailgating, cutting people off. This guy, though well under the speed limit, is recklessly endangering other drivers and is likely to cause an accident.
The matter isn't one of speed, though dangerous drivers are usually also speeders, it is one of drivers doing things with their vehicles that intimidate others on the road. A group of cars cruising at 80 together on a long stretch of highway is less likely to be in an accident than a group of cars with one young teenager who feels the need to show off his Honda Powered chickmobile. I'm sure the statistics bear this out.
The main thrust of those of us against such a device being installed in our cars is that we feel we are being punished because of a few idiot drivers. There must be a way to get those drivers off the road while letting the rest of us use speed safely.
There are 2 *very* ill-designed exit/onramps in the Puget Sound area.
The first is the I-405 South to South 167 interchange. The idiot civil engineer who designed this piece of crap needs to be shot. The backup runs for miles and there are frequent accidents leading up to the exit. Really good idea, put an exit immediately after a blind right curve and make the merging lane approximately 100 feet.
The other is the 520 to I-5 South interchange. This combined with drivers trying to get over 5 lanes to exit at Mercer causes some of the worst driving you'll ever see. How many of these grandmas and soccer moms realize that they have a full mile (1 minute at 60mph) to slowly and safely merge?
It sounds like a ploy to take the fun out of driving altogether. Is it a plot to move commuters to mass transit systems that may not be bound by these speed limiters?
Won't the police be missing a huge portion of their revenue with these cars on the road? Will they lower the speed limit to 30mph and catch speeders doing 40?
If he wants a device that does everything from word processing to emailing to gaming, he's going to have to settle on an OS to handle managing these tasks. His idea of a transparent OS has no merit when applied to the current PC paradigm, the paradigm to which he seems to subscribe.
We've had devices where one could sit down and start typing with no loss of keystrokes, they are called typewriters. We've had drafting devices that allowed one to sit down and draft without an OS getting in the way, they are called drafting boards and pencils.
The device that comes closest to an all-purpose device that Raskin is intimating is a game console. However, to switch between games (or theoretically applications) we still need to pop open the machine to swap media. Essentially the OS has been moved out of the machine into the user's brain. However, the device ceases to be an all-purpose device once an application is selected. How would I be able to check email while playing Tekken Tag? Without an OS to handle multiple programs simultaneously, to handle peripheral control, and to handle booting, I am SOL.
If he is interested in devices that do one job really well (toaster, lightswitch) then he'll have to settle for a plethora of devices tailored for a specific task. If he wants a transparent OS that allows him to run multiple programs on his PC, he'll have to sell his snakeoil somewhere else.
It's one thing to make an OS as non-intrusive as possible, but it's a whole different proposition to remove any semblance of an OS altogether.
I probably should have included that caveat. Bad programmers caught early early enough in their career can be taught good coding skills, but you are right about those who are incapable of learning even after years of development experience.
It's a shame, though. I still think that any 'bad' coder identified early enough could become a 'normal' or 'good' programmer with proper guidance. Unfortunately, there isn't a good teacher/mentor system in most companies, much less contracting companies.
Linuxgruven sells Linux training seminars. SAIR sells Linux training seminars. Linuxgruven probably needs seminar teachers.
Who could teach the Linuxgruven seminars better than former students (or students of SAIR)?
It's one thing to say that Linuxgruven's seminars suck and aren't worth the money, but that doesn't make it illegal. Neither does offerring the prospect of jobs to seminar attendees.
And what exactly does SAIR have to do with any of this?
2. High average team skill level. One of the touted advantages of XP is that its supposed to raise the average skill level of the team. I'll argue the other way: The lowest skilled team member will drag the team and the project down.
In a typical project where each team member works individually on some portion of the product, it seems clear that the low-skilled/newbie progammer will have trouble completing or correctly implementing his portion. In the end, someone will have to go back over his code and perhaps rewrite it altogether.
If we accept that a 'good' programmer is 10x more productive than a 'normal' programmer, it may also be accepted that a 'normal' programmer is likely 10x more productive than a 'bad' or 'new' programmer. While I don't claim that these numbers are by any means accurate, I think you catch my meaning, namely "Bad programmers can be eliminated from a project without the project schedule sufferring a whit."
However, I don't think we can assume that all projects are staffed by 'good' developers. Likely, projects are staffed by a mix of 'good', 'normal', and 'bad' programmers. It behooves the team to bring everyone up to at least the 'normal' level of programming skill. The quickest way to accomplish this is not to throw the 'bad' programmers (as they are the only ones who really need to improve significantly) into the deep end of code, but to have a 'good' or even 'above average' programmer mentor them. By teaming a 'good' and 'bad' programmer into a pair, you can create the teacher/apprentice relationship that results in improved skill of the 'bad' programmer.
The 'good' programmer may spend the majority of the time in front of the keyboard doing the 10x of work that is expected from him. He only loses a cycle or two standing behind the 'bad' programmer, watching and advising. Since the 'good' programmer can essentially dictate code to the 'bad' programmer, the actual cycles lost is negligble, in my opinion.
The newbie sees good code, hears good code, and gets to see how 'expert' programmers go about solving problems. This method of development gets everyone on the team up to a level of productivity that benefits everyone: the 'good' programmer gets a notch on the permanent record and more leverage when raises are passed out, the 'normal' programmer gets to work in tandem with another 'normal' programmer increasing the mutual productivity of both, and the 'bad'/'new' programmer gets to learn the ins and outs of the trenches that is difficult to learn in school.
I don't see any one software development methodology as a cure-all, but working in pairs may turn out to be a huge productivity booster.
Knuth, Stroustrup, Bentley, McConnell, Maguire , Binder, Jacobson, Booch, Rumbaugh, Brooks, the Four Horsemen, and Fowler
were all hacks who couldn't make it in the trenches, so they turned to the cushy life of academia. There's nothing to be gained by reading anything in any of their fluff. No Real Programmer would waste time reading this stuff, that's for sure!
For as much as Americans believe that their's is the land of the free, you live in one of the only places (if not the only place) in the western world where you do not have this right by law.
No American law prohibits the formation of a union.
How many of the non-unionized employees lost their jobs because the company was forced to pay non-productive employees for 3 months and provide them with massive benefits? How many jobs could have been saved?
Companies are not bottomless moneybags. If they are forced to pay for something in one sector, expect that another sector is going to be screwed out of their share. All you have shown is that pro-worker laws at the non-US location sucked valuable monetary resources from the US location, forcing a larger number of layoffs in the US.
Believe it or not, I think many people can sympathize with you. It is not unknown in this country that a person's entire lifetime savings has been completely wiped out by one bad string of bad luck. However, all is not hopeless. A savings account can be built back up, and it is likely that you are making the minimum in your locale.
I don't disagree with you. I think conditions are very favorable in the US for the tech industry. The infrastructure exists (though power is a little shaky these days) and the talent, for the most part, exists.
I doubt that a company would up and move at the first sight of a union organizer, but it stands to reason that other countries (India, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia) are wanting in on this gold rush and are laying the foundations necessary to support this industry on their own soil.
Currently, the pros of staying in the US far outweigh the cons. However, it is a matter of time before these emerging tech centers achieve parity with the US.
Of course, that's just my opinion.
Dancin Santa
I'm glad elves will work for gingerbread cookies and free dental care.
I think you're mistaken if you think a union would lobby Congress for laws that were more favorable *for* foreign workers. With the recent influx of H1B recipients, we have seen more xenophobia in the tech industry than we've seen in a long time. See this link from Washtech.
Slashdot Mirror
There is a fine line between speeding and reckless endangerment.
My speeding through the Northern California desert at 95 (at the least) mph does not endanger anyone. The roads are wide and flat and straight. I may be hustling along, but no one is in danger of me, primarily because no one else is around.
Now take the idiot who is ducking in and out of traffic at 50mph. No turn signals, crossing multiple lanes of traffic, tailgating, cutting people off. This guy, though well under the speed limit, is recklessly endangering other drivers and is likely to cause an accident.
The matter isn't one of speed, though dangerous drivers are usually also speeders, it is one of drivers doing things with their vehicles that intimidate others on the road. A group of cars cruising at 80 together on a long stretch of highway is less likely to be in an accident than a group of cars with one young teenager who feels the need to show off his Honda Powered chickmobile. I'm sure the statistics bear this out.
The main thrust of those of us against such a device being installed in our cars is that we feel we are being punished because of a few idiot drivers. There must be a way to get those drivers off the road while letting the rest of us use speed safely.
Dancin Santa
There are 2 *very* ill-designed exit/onramps in the Puget Sound area.
The first is the I-405 South to South 167 interchange. The idiot civil engineer who designed this piece of crap needs to be shot. The backup runs for miles and there are frequent accidents leading up to the exit. Really good idea, put an exit immediately after a blind right curve and make the merging lane approximately 100 feet.
The other is the 520 to I-5 South interchange. This combined with drivers trying to get over 5 lanes to exit at Mercer causes some of the worst driving you'll ever see. How many of these grandmas and soccer moms realize that they have a full mile (1 minute at 60mph) to slowly and safely merge?
Makes a person almost want to move...
Dancin Santa
It sounds like a ploy to take the fun out of driving altogether. Is it a plot to move commuters to mass transit systems that may not be bound by these speed limiters?
Dancin Santa
Won't the police be missing a huge portion of their revenue with these cars on the road? Will they lower the speed limit to 30mph and catch speeders doing 40?
Dancin Santa
If he wants a device that does everything from word processing to emailing to gaming, he's going to have to settle on an OS to handle managing these tasks. His idea of a transparent OS has no merit when applied to the current PC paradigm, the paradigm to which he seems to subscribe.
We've had devices where one could sit down and start typing with no loss of keystrokes, they are called typewriters. We've had drafting devices that allowed one to sit down and draft without an OS getting in the way, they are called drafting boards and pencils.
The device that comes closest to an all-purpose device that Raskin is intimating is a game console. However, to switch between games (or theoretically applications) we still need to pop open the machine to swap media. Essentially the OS has been moved out of the machine into the user's brain. However, the device ceases to be an all-purpose device once an application is selected. How would I be able to check email while playing Tekken Tag? Without an OS to handle multiple programs simultaneously, to handle peripheral control, and to handle booting, I am SOL.
If he is interested in devices that do one job really well (toaster, lightswitch) then he'll have to settle for a plethora of devices tailored for a specific task. If he wants a transparent OS that allows him to run multiple programs on his PC, he'll have to sell his snakeoil somewhere else.
It's one thing to make an OS as non-intrusive as possible, but it's a whole different proposition to remove any semblance of an OS altogether.
Dancin Santa
It's more like Master of Magic than Master of Orion...
I'm having trouble...
It's more like Master of Magic with its melee combat than Civ.
Dancin Santa
Although some features like voices do not work, the MOO series has been pretty good.
It's more like Master of Magic than Master of Orion, IMHO.
Dancin Santa
Antarans Return Fire?
Dancin Santa
Hi groupie! ssshhh, I'm anonymous!
Dancin Santa
I probably should have included that caveat. Bad programmers caught early early enough in their career can be taught good coding skills, but you are right about those who are incapable of learning even after years of development experience.
It's a shame, though. I still think that any 'bad' coder identified early enough could become a 'normal' or 'good' programmer with proper guidance. Unfortunately, there isn't a good teacher/mentor system in most companies, much less contracting companies.
Dancin Santa
And we should also make them all use Linux.
Man, haven't you watched *any* sci-fi movies in the last 3 decades???
We are *not* putting anything resembling operational software anywhere near these headless bodies. The possible consequences are dire!
Dancin Santa
Some assumptions and conclusions:
1) It seems to me that creating an object with no 'soul' is not unethical.
2) All sentience is isolated to the brain.
3) Sentience is equivalent to a 'soul'.
4) It is not impossible to manipulate genes to produce a desired cellular mass.
5) A body with no head has no sentience.
6) It is possible to create a human body with no head.
7) These bodies will likely be derogatorily called 'organ factories'.
8) Organ factories are *not* unethical.
Therefore we should start creating organ factories in order to increase our human lifespans.
Dancin Santa
I think we can safely say that Linuxgruven employees are not a bit familiar with <br> tag.
Dancin Santa
Doesn't the first key investor have a problem with putting a bounty on this kind of thing?
Dancin Santa
Linuxgruven sells Linux training seminars. SAIR sells Linux training seminars. Linuxgruven probably needs seminar teachers.
Who could teach the Linuxgruven seminars better than former students (or students of SAIR)?
It's one thing to say that Linuxgruven's seminars suck and aren't worth the money, but that doesn't make it illegal. Neither does offerring the prospect of jobs to seminar attendees.
And what exactly does SAIR have to do with any of this?
Dancin Santa
It's always made me laugh that project leaders over on SourceForge actually have timelines worked out for their projects.
X workitem will take Y days...etc.
I don't see how they can begin to think that they have any control over the volunteers.
Dancin Santa
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer this month publicly said that Linux was his company's greatest threat going forward.
Is that a head fake or a road map?
Should the Linux community even care? If everyone is so focused on bringing this OS to the masses, will the hobbyists support its ascent?
Dancin Santa
2. High average team skill level. One of the touted advantages of XP is that its supposed to raise the average skill level of the team. I'll argue the other way: The lowest skilled team member will drag the team and the project down.
In a typical project where each team member works individually on some portion of the product, it seems clear that the low-skilled/newbie progammer will have trouble completing or correctly implementing his portion. In the end, someone will have to go back over his code and perhaps rewrite it altogether.
If we accept that a 'good' programmer is 10x more productive than a 'normal' programmer, it may also be accepted that a 'normal' programmer is likely 10x more productive than a 'bad' or 'new' programmer. While I don't claim that these numbers are by any means accurate, I think you catch my meaning, namely "Bad programmers can be eliminated from a project without the project schedule sufferring a whit."
However, I don't think we can assume that all projects are staffed by 'good' developers. Likely, projects are staffed by a mix of 'good', 'normal', and 'bad' programmers. It behooves the team to bring everyone up to at least the 'normal' level of programming skill. The quickest way to accomplish this is not to throw the 'bad' programmers (as they are the only ones who really need to improve significantly) into the deep end of code, but to have a 'good' or even 'above average' programmer mentor them. By teaming a 'good' and 'bad' programmer into a pair, you can create the teacher/apprentice relationship that results in improved skill of the 'bad' programmer.
The 'good' programmer may spend the majority of the time in front of the keyboard doing the 10x of work that is expected from him. He only loses a cycle or two standing behind the 'bad' programmer, watching and advising. Since the 'good' programmer can essentially dictate code to the 'bad' programmer, the actual cycles lost is negligble, in my opinion.
The newbie sees good code, hears good code, and gets to see how 'expert' programmers go about solving problems. This method of development gets everyone on the team up to a level of productivity that benefits everyone: the 'good' programmer gets a notch on the permanent record and more leverage when raises are passed out, the 'normal' programmer gets to work in tandem with another 'normal' programmer increasing the mutual productivity of both, and the 'bad'/'new' programmer gets to learn the ins and outs of the trenches that is difficult to learn in school.
I don't see any one software development methodology as a cure-all, but working in pairs may turn out to be a huge productivity booster.
Dancin Santa
I agree!
e ,
Knuth,
Stroustrup,
Bentley,
McConnell,
Maguir
Binder,
Jacobson,
Booch,
Rumbaugh,
Brooks,
the Four Horsemen,
and Fowler
were all hacks who couldn't make it in the trenches, so they turned to the cushy life of academia. There's nothing to be gained by reading anything in any of their fluff. No Real Programmer would waste time reading this stuff, that's for sure!
Dancin Santa
I've been getting funky slash.pm and Internal Server 500 errors on slashdot today, you guys trying to upgrade Slashcode or something?
They've got an error on line 995 of Slash.pm.
Dancin Santa
For as much as Americans believe that their's is the land of the free, you live in one of the only places (if not the only place) in the western world where you do not have this right by law.
No American law prohibits the formation of a union.
Dancin Santa
How many of the non-unionized employees lost their jobs because the company was forced to pay non-productive employees for 3 months and provide them with massive benefits? How many jobs could have been saved?
Companies are not bottomless moneybags. If they are forced to pay for something in one sector, expect that another sector is going to be screwed out of their share. All you have shown is that pro-worker laws at the non-US location sucked valuable monetary resources from the US location, forcing a larger number of layoffs in the US.
Dancin Santa
Believe it or not, I think many people can sympathize with you. It is not unknown in this country that a person's entire lifetime savings has been completely wiped out by one bad string of bad luck. However, all is not hopeless. A savings account can be built back up, and it is likely that you are making the minimum in your locale.
Good luck!
Dancin Santa
I don't disagree with you. I think conditions are very favorable in the US for the tech industry. The infrastructure exists (though power is a little shaky these days) and the talent, for the most part, exists.
I doubt that a company would up and move at the first sight of a union organizer, but it stands to reason that other countries (India, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia) are wanting in on this gold rush and are laying the foundations necessary to support this industry on their own soil.
Currently, the pros of staying in the US far outweigh the cons. However, it is a matter of time before these emerging tech centers achieve parity with the US.
Of course, that's just my opinion.
Dancin Santa
I'm glad elves will work for gingerbread cookies and free dental care.
I think you're mistaken if you think a union would lobby Congress for laws that were more favorable *for* foreign workers. With the recent influx of H1B recipients, we have seen more xenophobia in the tech industry than we've seen in a long time. See this link from Washtech.
Dancin Santa