And last I checked, students, regardless of race, decide their own college majors.
No, they are guided into the college majors due to external factors (e.g. availability, based on region and available material, and social pressure, where Barbie says math is hard).
What should be a 5 minute problem usually blows out to wasting hours of my time trying to get in contact with somebody with 2/3 of a clue.
I work in tech-support.
Even if you do get a technician on the line, he is effectivly neutered unless you have he has access to the appropriate resources. For example, my team is expected to support General PC problems, Apple problems, SOHO Networking problems (networks, wireless), and Enterprise (MS-Echange, Blackberry BES).
While I can link up to the manufacturer with some products, this doesn't always work. In addition, without local assets that I can play with, I either make incorrect assumptions (e.g. troubleshoot WinXP as if it were Win2000, by going by what I can see), or get stuck completely.
I used to have access to a Macintosh system at the call center - however, this has been moved to another department, and has thus crippled the ability to troubleshoot macs. (I never otherwise had consistant access to a Macintosh.)
"stdio.h" is valid - it merely searches the local directory before searching through the system folders. It's not a bug until "stdio.h" appears in the project folder.
int main(void) {
printf("hello world\n");
return 0; }
Skipping the "int" qualifier for main is not a bug. It's an obsolete way of writing a program, but not a bug. In fact, you can find it even in the ANSI-C book by K&R for the hello world program. It's a bug only in C++.
Omitting the return statement is a bug - of neglegable impact. At worst, it confuses the completion state of the program. (Although there are reports stating that omitting the return statement should default to "return 0" - I wouldn't rely on that.)
As easy way to teach users about general scams is to write a game where you simply have to click on a specific icon as much as possible. It's easy at first, but it gradually starts to create pop-ups that impede progress.
Hopefully it'll turn out better than the rather lackluster Star Trek: New Worlds RTS did.
Everything turned out better than New Worlds, including the other Star Trek RTS games.
The game failed because the developer was too damn lazy to fix the most obvious of game balance problems, interface problems, and content problems.
It's now in the depths of obscurity, as you cannot get it working with a stock install of Windows XP or STNW - you have to find and install the Compatability Administrator tool, and do trial and error to find out the correct emulation setting.
the Armada series is already an above-average space-based Star Trek RTS. Built off the Age of Empires system, I believe.
That's Star Wars Galactic Battlegrounds.
Armada had to be written from scratch, as it doesn't share a similar style with another RTS - there is heavy use of spellcasters, it used it's own 3D engine, and the command pallette is not similar enough to another RTS to be called a varient. In addition, it's combat system overloaded the crew as the hitpoints of the craft (which was changed in Armada II).
Is it just me or are realtime strategy games becoming too complicated to run in realtime?
Actually, the problem is that strategy games are not complicated enough. You mentioned Command & Conquer [Tiberian Dawn] - here's a typical example from that game:
- Select a group of units, and assign them to group 1. - Attack the enemy base, by clicking directly on the target. - Select the units you just built, and add them to group 1. - Continue the attack, by clicking directly on the target.
You will note that your reinforcement units will instantly stop the instant their assigned target blows up. To date, the only major games that fixed this problem are Tiberian Sun and Red Alert 2 - most other games ignore this problem or have a slower method of allowing the player to do what he wants.
I can give other examples in that game where simplicity interferes with gameplay, but that's generally stating common knowledge.
Lets not forget the predecessor, Dune II, where you couldn't more than one unit (along with a low unit cap).
Of course, turn based games always seem to have some AI and balancing issues.
So do most RTS games - it's almost as if AI and balancing is usually a second class citizen.
These so-called "gold farmers" are freelancers who get paid to play games, so naturally the PC Gamer editors are getting irate. It's unwelcome competition! The only difference is that the farmers don't then turn around and kiss up to the publishers of the games they play so that they get to sell ad space and scoop the screenshots for the next round of titles.
Not only that, but it interferes with other MMORPG systems such as Project Entropia. In that game, farming is acceptable and money is known to buy whatever items you want.
The guy did not steal any actual cash; nor did he sell stolen items for cash. He also did not cause injury to any person.
Spray-painting a back-alley wall meets these criteria as well. It also meets the same criteria as causing damage (e.g. requiring someone to do repairs to the affected property.)
So (if I was in a hiring position, and I thought he had reformed, and he was honest about what he had done) I would consider hiring him.
I have one question - how can you tell that he has reformed? And while I'm asking, how can you make your potential clients (e.g. a large quantity of customers, government agencies requiring top-secret) believe that he has reformed as well?
This is an abuse-of-trust situation - the system administrator was trusted, and he violated that trust. This is not a "script-kiddie" that is just trying to learn. It is also not an accident as the account was willfully deleted.
So I would be a little cautious about throwing him out with the bathwater.
And that's why he won't be hired in the future. If you are cautious about throwing out a clean sysadmin, you can be certain other HR personnel *will not* hire a person with such a criminal conviction that has not been pardoned.
It's also useless for the task at hand. Some of the literal requirements listed at the bottom involve GUI Design rather than workflow patterns.
Of course, it does look like a "homework" assignment that any CS graduate can solve - especially with the first point in particular, which involves a simple database query (it is possible to cache the result, which is also considered trivial.)
It's not as lame as "Journal of a Transaction". That can be set up by the simplest of textbooks or manuals.
So IBM are apparently claiming $20,350 at $50/hour to investigate the incident. That's 50 man days. For fsck's sake, what sort of incompetent morons are they employing? Call it a couple of hours to trawl some log files, a few more to retrieve the missing account from backup, and be generous and round it up to a week -- 5 man days to tie up all the loose ends, write the incident report and get management signoff for everything
Here's some basic information: - Those 5 or 50 man days were spent cleaning up on the incident, and are not recoverable. (As opposed to endless meetings that "optimize" the performance of the company.) While it may not seem like a lot, it just takes one lost man day on a critical path to slow down an entire project. - Restoring from backup is not typically a drag-and-drop operation. In general, most large companies use backup tapes to store a large amount of data, and those are not typically random access. - When there is a person with Administrator privilages that made the changes, you need to assume Rootkit. This takes a lot of time to steralize the computer and examine what went wrong. In addition, you can't always assume that the logs are legitimate. - You still need to to check whether a script kiddie simply cracked the password to an account, or if it was a disgruntled employee that used an idle account.
What appears to be a simple 5 man hours of work can easily balloon into 50, especially when you have to prove things beyond a reasonable doubt for a criminial conviction.
Yeah, he screwed up, and deserved to be punished, but the punishment should be proportional to the crime, and it clearly isn't here.
No, he didn't screw up. A screw-up requires incompetance, and does not apply to malice of any form (unless the incompetance existed during the malicious act.)
The punk who made that software promised a source release for a very long time,
When did he promise a source code release? Note that a plan to release the source does not qualify as a promise.
BTW, the reason it wasn't released was because a few loud individuals made it clear that they would not respect the copyright. Now, we have a game that has a few bugs, that is closed source, and is cheat protected.
along with the fact that most people do not know better or care...
They will care the instant NAV is identified as a performance bottleneck.
I've been using some version NAV 7 for a while, as the license of NAV 7.0 permitted distribution to allow employees at a government department to install it on the home computer. While I was protected by viruses, there was some performance loss with the real-time protection:
- Saving emulator states in the VICE emulator was slowed down by two seconds (saving is normally instant.) - The automatic save in Empire Earth took 5 more seconds than normal. Right now, it took 1-2 seconds, which is noticable but not bad.
This was nowhere near as bad as a previous AV product I had. That previous program locked up the system for 20 seconds when I attempted to download a file - and since I had a WinModem, it caused the computer to disconnect from the Internet. However, any performance loss that can be eyeballed needs to be explained in a readme file, along with an explaination that future updates can and will fix these performance issues.
However, he's closer to right with that last comment. Balance is an important thing in life
Yes, and that's why I spend 40 hours a week at work, not counting the 2 hours of travel-time that requires a 15-minute walk (going to and from work).
Besides, an "average" person has weekends off, and there are not as many volunteer organizations that are open on those days. Likewise, there are some people who are on nights - on their days off, they don't have access to volunteer operations (as most places are closed.)
Go outside? What the hell is this man smoking? It's 40 degrees outside and windy which means it's pretty damn cold. I'd sure as hell like him to tell me why he thinks it's so great outdoors and just what he plans to do once he starts freezing his own ass off out there.
Actually, 40 degrees and windy is on the painfully hot side.
Regardless of your choice of temperature scale, there is one extremely big hole in his argument - going outside is considered derelition of duty.
FYI, the night shift is 12 hours long - if you get more than 2 calls, it is a busy night. Any paperwork that you needed to do was already completed ten times over.
You see where I'm going. It's like programmers bitching about no one knowing assembler any more, when no one apart from serious system optimizers (or race car drivers....) need to know it.
Programmers still need to know assembler. As long as there are languages of C and C++ (which include pointers), a minimal understanding of the function of assembly language is required.
I've been seeing a lot of questions on the C, C++ and Java newsgroups from amateur programmers - and these questions can be self-answered if the person in question knew how assembler worked.
and because you know that it's windows you know that 99.9% of the time c:/progra~1 = "program files", very kludgy, but the reverse case is simple, someone requests "longfilename.exe", you notice its > 11 chars so why not hunt the fat for "longfi~1.exe", oh look there it is.
You can't search for the correct one by looking for "longfi~1.exe", without bumping into one problem. As a result, you have to look through the filestructure to get the correct LFN. Because of this, the correct word to use is "Defective", not "Kludgy".
(As a side note, they aren't really pointers in FAT16 - the're merely entries that are located directly after the short name.)
I've been doing business with them through three employers, for almost 15 years.
And for the record, I'm talking about CDW
If they have it in stock, they WILL deliver, overnight if you need it that bad, and they stand behind their stuff. They have great relationships with their suppliers as well, so if you need pre-sales support, they can make that happen as well.
Although I'm not technically employed by CDW, I am contracted to handle their customer service. Their warehouse is closed on statutory holidays, on the weekend and during nighttime hours. While this does work for a normal retail store, it's not ideal for mail-order when government clients need things now.
I've encountered or seen: - Products that were in-stock at time of order, but entered backorder, and then were shipped past the due date. The result was the projector was shipped to the home address when the customer needed it for something overseas. - Items that were shipped out defective and returned via RMA - only to discover that the product sent out was supposed to be directed to another customer. - Items that were supposed to be sent out but somehow remained in the warehouse. When they discovered the extra item and commenced the shipping procedure, it somehow disappeared and thus the item was on back-order.
They're an excellent company if things work out properly - but all Murphy's Law varients say that things will go wrong in every possible circumstance. These issues aren't specific to CDW either - these issues happen to every company that does not have operations online 24x7. When mission critical components break, the company isn't available to support what happens.
Naturally, I'm a little biased - I'm technically a rookie that knows that there was not enough training or materials provided about the equipment (e.g. how do the phones work), procedures (e.g. What are the store hours - something that is not immediatly visible at my workstation), and technology (e.g. How do I troubleshoot a Mac, when the only computers in the line of sight of the line of sight are Windows IBM PCs?).
As far as I know, CDW is a good choice and appears to be great when you aren't on front-line customer service, and haven't encountered CS problems.
Gee, according to wikipedia and a previous article here on Slashdot, World of Warcraft broke 5 million suscribers months ago. This guy at Forrester got paid to write this?
Does it have 5 million now?
Just because something hits the magical 5 million barrier doesn't mean that it will remain at 5 million. It may have dropped off to 3.5 million for varying reasons.
His figure may still be incorrect, but neither is assuming that the maximum is always current.
Those who are slow learners will quickly be frustrated by having the progress of the "game" be blocked by a sudden spelling or math problem that's difficult to figure out, while more adept students will have to wonder what the monster's motivation is for handing out schoolwork.
Actually, I generally find my progress blocked because I typed the wrong number. In some of those "fun" games, you need to answer all thirty questions correctly - one wrong answer and you have to start from scratch.
I can give you the reason the monster is giving out math problems - it is trying to scare the player. In edutainment software, there's no better way to do it other than to give out a math problem, as most students find math hard because their Barbie doll said so.
Could it be that that your experience with Linear Algebra did not teach you how to do advanced Math, but rather how to pass that particular test.
I won't speak for the original poster, but in the case of Math, there is generally one way to solve the problem. A computer system (or at least a properly designed one) can churn out a problem the instant one is solved, and is thus useful for drilling students.
I have three textbooks concerning mathematics - basic math (a large book that contains standard algebra and calculus), Linear Algebra (Advanced math), and Numerical Analysis. Even though I studied math in college, I forgot some of it since I did not have a place to store reference material (but I did find a replacement math book.) The replacement math book shows how to do things, and thus will allow me to re-learn the material.
It always seemed to me when you had a teacher that they would give questions on the test which didn't much look like the examples from the book we had done, similarly with their chalkboard lectures. It's easy to memorize, it's difficult to understand. Does that make sense?
That makes sense, but in the case of math, I've never seen a problem that couldn't eventually be broken down and solved (excluding problems that require information that was never covered in class or in available textbooks).
I've used computer instruction of one form or another since around 1985. I have yet to be impressed with any of them.
I was impressed with one that managed to make 0+0+0 = 180...
As you know, the angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees. By clicking on the exact same point three times, it would sum up the angles (in this case, an angle to an identical point is 0 defrees, and there are three of them), and since three points mean a triangle, 0 must equal 180.
Other than that, the program was mediocre. In general, you could learn how to solve its multiple-choice tests as it's wrong answers had only one difference from the correct answer. I can't give the name since it's been a while, but it was rated as Grade 7-9.
1) no virtual desktops. Virtual desktops play an important role in good productivity.
It's a downloadable add-on. You can choose nView, or any other download.
2) no modern C++ compiler. I have VC++ 6.0, but I couldn't port my code from gcc over to msvc.
You can download either Cygwin, MiniGW, or the MSVC Compiler Toolkit (along with the Platform SDK).
Besides - porting system-specific code from one compiler to another is always difficult. As an example, try porting "Fortune" to Windows. This will require some cheap and quick hacks, since function prototypes in the main C files use system-specific features.
The only thing you will miss out with the toolkit is the MFC and ATL - something that can be implemented by the user.
3) no decent command line. Some things are much easier to do in the command line; for example, searching for files, then selecting some of them due to search criteria, then zipping and sending them to a specific folder. Doing this in Windows is not as easy and intuitive as in Linux.
Searching for files is done by pressing Winkey-F. If you need to hunt down specific files by another special search creiteria, you can click one of the search options. If you need greater control over that, then you probably need a better organization system.
4) problems with not being admin. In Linux, I can do many more things without being admin than in Windows. Linux feels safer (and most probably is).
These problems are usually associated with improperly written software. They can occurr under Linux as well - although in that OS, there are some programs that unconditionally refuse to run as root (without reason.)
The biggest culprits are copy-protection systems for video games, and installation of new programs.
5) bad update tools. When I configured YAST for online update, I could select from thousands of packages to be automatically updated, as well as their dependencies. No such luck with Windows, as the Microsoft update site only has...Microsoft updates. In Windows, I had to visit many different sites in order to download and install updates.
That is correct - although this is generally caused by company rivalry.
6) drive letters are problematic. I have setup my projects to drive E:, but somehow Windows decided to give the drive a different drive letter once I reconfigured the partitions. Then my project broke. I had to replace all drive references in all the project files.
Settings -> Control Panel -> Administrative Tools -> Computer Management -> Storage -> Disk Management -> Right Click F: -> Change Drive Letter and Paths.
BTW, a properly configured application/project doesn't use hard-coded paths. I'm not sure how do use relative paths instead, but I have no problem when I move project folders around
In any case, both Windows and Linux are primitive. They still have a legacy base that keep on coming back from the graveyard (e.g. Dos drive letters, or Unix man pages.) The only way to fix this problem is to redesign a new operating system from scratch - good luck getting market penetration since neither OS/2 or Beos are around anymore.
The same reason you parition (or split) your Linux filesystem so that/usr is on a different drive.
In Windows XP, you can partition your HD so that you can store your base OS on drive 1, store your apps/games/movies on drive 2, and your work stuff on drive 3. (Of course, you want to hide your games, so you have to put it in a directory called "Dos" to prevent wives/parents from snooping.)
It seems to be taken for granted that this is a weakness of the operating system.
However, fakes aren't stopping at clothes and fashion. The problem is that if you don't fight counterfeit very efficiently, you soon see them appear in places where reliability and traceability are paramount. What about bad components crashing a mission-critical system? Fake brake pads in your car that overheat and fail? Or even worse, fake antibiotics and aviation parts? All these are happening today and are a major concern.?
Mission critical systems normally procure their products directly from the manufacturer, or from a known reseller of the manufacturer - in either case, something that is known and trusted. In addition, for a new supplier, they will generally perform rigerous testing on the product.
This procedure alone stops all but the most experienced of counterfeiters, as mission critical systems need to build up a pattern of trust beforehand.
For regular service, counterfeiters can go in just fine by creating medium quality products. I know one government organization that got burnt by counterfeit network cards - while the cards individually met the specification, they were all cloned with identical MAC addresses.
Even 1st class developers like RARE and id are releasing mediocre games when compared to what they previously developed. DOOM 3 and PERFECT DARK ZERO are two prime examples of deleopers dropping the ball.
Doom, when compared to Wolf3D, is considered better because of improved Mod support and graphics. The game was better because you could actually strafe - but it still had problems of an elementry grade FPS (with strafe-running and such).
Quake, when compared to Doom, is considered better because of improved Mod support and graphics. The game itself was just as mediocre as Doom, perhaps worse, since you could fly through the monsters much more easily. (Especially on Nightmare mode.)
Quake 2, when compared to Quake, is considred better because of improved Mod support and graphics. The game itself was just as mediocre as Quake, but at least there was a better illusion of intellegence. (Hard+ difficulty wasn't different than Hard.)
Quake 3, when compared to Quake 2, is considered better because of improved Mod Support and graphics. The game itself simply relied on multiplayer and mod support.
Doom 3, when compared to Quake 3, creates the exact same reasoning. Any expectations that came from the game was hyped by the customers, not the developers.
When was the last time iD Software released a *good* game? Not at all - they are engine developers, not game programmers. Any game released with their engine is simply good enough to demonstrate their engine so that other developers can purchase a licence and make a better product.
Epic did the same thing with its Unreal engine - some of their latest installments (UT2K3 and UT2K4) may be mediocre but the engine itself is extremely popular.
Slashdot Mirror
And last I checked, students, regardless of race, decide their own college majors.
No, they are guided into the college majors due to external factors (e.g. availability, based on region and available material, and social pressure, where Barbie says math is hard).
I work in tech-support.
Even if you do get a technician on the line, he is effectivly neutered unless you have he has access to the appropriate resources. For example, my team is expected to support General PC problems, Apple problems, SOHO Networking problems (networks, wireless), and Enterprise (MS-Echange, Blackberry BES).
While I can link up to the manufacturer with some products, this doesn't always work. In addition, without local assets that I can play with, I either make incorrect assumptions (e.g. troubleshoot WinXP as if it were Win2000, by going by what I can see), or get stuck completely.
I used to have access to a Macintosh system at the call center - however, this has been moved to another department, and has thus crippled the ability to troubleshoot macs. (I never otherwise had consistant access to a Macintosh.)
"stdio.h" is valid - it merely searches the local directory before searching through the system folders. It's not a bug until "stdio.h" appears in the project folder.
int main(void)
{
printf("hello world\n");
return 0;
}
Skipping the "int" qualifier for main is not a bug. It's an obsolete way of writing a program, but not a bug. In fact, you can find it even in the ANSI-C book by K&R for the hello world program. It's a bug only in C++.
Omitting the return statement is a bug - of neglegable impact. At worst, it confuses the completion state of the program. (Although there are reports stating that omitting the return statement should default to "return 0" - I wouldn't rely on that.)
As easy way to teach users about general scams is to write a game where you simply have to click on a specific icon as much as possible. It's easy at first, but it gradually starts to create pop-ups that impede progress.
m e_id=204
There are some people that find this suggestion to be humourous - but I'm dead serious: Follow and distribute the following link - http://www.neopets.com/games/launch_game.phtml?ga
The actual game is here: http://www.neopets.com/games/advertattack.phtml
Registration is recommended, but not required, to play the game.
Everything turned out better than New Worlds, including the other Star Trek RTS games.
The game failed because the developer was too damn lazy to fix the most obvious of game balance problems, interface problems, and content problems.
It's now in the depths of obscurity, as you cannot get it working with a stock install of Windows XP or STNW - you have to find and install the Compatability Administrator tool, and do trial and error to find out the correct emulation setting.
That's Star Wars Galactic Battlegrounds.
Armada had to be written from scratch, as it doesn't share a similar style with another RTS - there is heavy use of spellcasters, it used it's own 3D engine, and the command pallette is not similar enough to another RTS to be called a varient. In addition, it's combat system overloaded the crew as the hitpoints of the craft (which was changed in Armada II).
Actually, the problem is that strategy games are not complicated enough. You mentioned Command & Conquer [Tiberian Dawn] - here's a typical example from that game:
- Select a group of units, and assign them to group 1.
- Attack the enemy base, by clicking directly on the target.
- Select the units you just built, and add them to group 1.
- Continue the attack, by clicking directly on the target.
You will note that your reinforcement units will instantly stop the instant their assigned target blows up. To date, the only major games that fixed this problem are Tiberian Sun and Red Alert 2 - most other games ignore this problem or have a slower method of allowing the player to do what he wants.
I can give other examples in that game where simplicity interferes with gameplay, but that's generally stating common knowledge.
Lets not forget the predecessor, Dune II, where you couldn't more than one unit (along with a low unit cap).
So do most RTS games - it's almost as if AI and balancing is usually a second class citizen.
Not only that, but it interferes with other MMORPG systems such as Project Entropia. In that game, farming is acceptable and money is known to buy whatever items you want.
Spray-painting a back-alley wall meets these criteria as well. It also meets the same criteria as causing damage (e.g. requiring someone to do repairs to the affected property.)
I have one question - how can you tell that he has reformed? And while I'm asking, how can you make your potential clients (e.g. a large quantity of customers, government agencies requiring top-secret) believe that he has reformed as well?
This is an abuse-of-trust situation - the system administrator was trusted, and he violated that trust. This is not a "script-kiddie" that is just trying to learn. It is also not an accident as the account was willfully deleted.
And that's why he won't be hired in the future. If you are cautious about throwing out a clean sysadmin, you can be certain other HR personnel *will not* hire a person with such a criminal conviction that has not been pardoned.
It's also useless for the task at hand. Some of the literal requirements listed at the bottom involve GUI Design rather than workflow patterns.
Of course, it does look like a "homework" assignment that any CS graduate can solve - especially with the first point in particular, which involves a simple database query (it is possible to cache the result, which is also considered trivial.)
It's not as lame as "Journal of a Transaction". That can be set up by the simplest of textbooks or manuals.
Here's some basic information:
- Those 5 or 50 man days were spent cleaning up on the incident, and are not recoverable. (As opposed to endless meetings that "optimize" the performance of the company.) While it may not seem like a lot, it just takes one lost man day on a critical path to slow down an entire project.
- Restoring from backup is not typically a drag-and-drop operation. In general, most large companies use backup tapes to store a large amount of data, and those are not typically random access.
- When there is a person with Administrator privilages that made the changes, you need to assume Rootkit. This takes a lot of time to steralize the computer and examine what went wrong. In addition, you can't always assume that the logs are legitimate.
- You still need to to check whether a script kiddie simply cracked the password to an account, or if it was a disgruntled employee that used an idle account.
What appears to be a simple 5 man hours of work can easily balloon into 50, especially when you have to prove things beyond a reasonable doubt for a criminial conviction.
No, he didn't screw up. A screw-up requires incompetance, and does not apply to malice of any form (unless the incompetance existed during the malicious act.)
When did he promise a source code release? Note that a plan to release the source does not qualify as a promise.
BTW, the reason it wasn't released was because a few loud individuals made it clear that they would not respect the copyright. Now, we have a game that has a few bugs, that is closed source, and is cheat protected.
They will care the instant NAV is identified as a performance bottleneck.
I've been using some version NAV 7 for a while, as the license of NAV 7.0 permitted distribution to allow employees at a government department to install it on the home computer. While I was protected by viruses, there was some performance loss with the real-time protection:
- Saving emulator states in the VICE emulator was slowed down by two seconds (saving is normally instant.)
- The automatic save in Empire Earth took 5 more seconds than normal. Right now, it took 1-2 seconds, which is noticable but not bad.
This was nowhere near as bad as a previous AV product I had. That previous program locked up the system for 20 seconds when I attempted to download a file - and since I had a WinModem, it caused the computer to disconnect from the Internet. However, any performance loss that can be eyeballed needs to be explained in a readme file, along with an explaination that future updates can and will fix these performance issues.
Yes, and that's why I spend 40 hours a week at work, not counting the 2 hours of travel-time that requires a 15-minute walk (going to and from work).
Besides, an "average" person has weekends off, and there are not as many volunteer organizations that are open on those days. Likewise, there are some people who are on nights - on their days off, they don't have access to volunteer operations (as most places are closed.)
Actually, 40 degrees and windy is on the painfully hot side.
Regardless of your choice of temperature scale, there is one extremely big hole in his argument - going outside is considered derelition of duty.
FYI, the night shift is 12 hours long - if you get more than 2 calls, it is a busy night. Any paperwork that you needed to do was already completed ten times over.
Programmers still need to know assembler. As long as there are languages of C and C++ (which include pointers), a minimal understanding of the function of assembly language is required.
I've been seeing a lot of questions on the C, C++ and Java newsgroups from amateur programmers - and these questions can be self-answered if the person in question knew how assembler worked.
What happens when you have the following names:
- longfilename.exe
- longfilenam.exe
- longfilenam2.exe
- longfilenom2.exe
You can't search for the correct one by looking for "longfi~1.exe", without bumping into one problem. As a result, you have to look through the filestructure to get the correct LFN. Because of this, the correct word to use is "Defective", not "Kludgy".
(As a side note, they aren't really pointers in FAT16 - the're merely entries that are located directly after the short name.)
Although I'm not technically employed by CDW, I am contracted to handle their customer service. Their warehouse is closed on statutory holidays, on the weekend and during nighttime hours. While this does work for a normal retail store, it's not ideal for mail-order when government clients need things now.
I've encountered or seen:
- Products that were in-stock at time of order, but entered backorder, and then were shipped past the due date. The result was the projector was shipped to the home address when the customer needed it for something overseas.
- Items that were shipped out defective and returned via RMA - only to discover that the product sent out was supposed to be directed to another customer.
- Items that were supposed to be sent out but somehow remained in the warehouse. When they discovered the extra item and commenced the shipping procedure, it somehow disappeared and thus the item was on back-order.
They're an excellent company if things work out properly - but all Murphy's Law varients say that things will go wrong in every possible circumstance. These issues aren't specific to CDW either - these issues happen to every company that does not have operations online 24x7. When mission critical components break, the company isn't available to support what happens.
Naturally, I'm a little biased - I'm technically a rookie that knows that there was not enough training or materials provided about the equipment (e.g. how do the phones work), procedures (e.g. What are the store hours - something that is not immediatly visible at my workstation), and technology (e.g. How do I troubleshoot a Mac, when the only computers in the line of sight of the line of sight are Windows IBM PCs?).
As far as I know, CDW is a good choice and appears to be great when you aren't on front-line customer service, and haven't encountered CS problems.
Does it have 5 million now?
Just because something hits the magical 5 million barrier doesn't mean that it will remain at 5 million. It may have dropped off to 3.5 million for varying reasons.
His figure may still be incorrect, but neither is assuming that the maximum is always current.
Actually, I generally find my progress blocked because I typed the wrong number. In some of those "fun" games, you need to answer all thirty questions correctly - one wrong answer and you have to start from scratch.
I can give you the reason the monster is giving out math problems - it is trying to scare the player. In edutainment software, there's no better way to do it other than to give out a math problem, as most students find math hard because their Barbie doll said so.
I won't speak for the original poster, but in the case of Math, there is generally one way to solve the problem. A computer system (or at least a properly designed one) can churn out a problem the instant one is solved, and is thus useful for drilling students.
I have three textbooks concerning mathematics - basic math (a large book that contains standard algebra and calculus), Linear Algebra (Advanced math), and Numerical Analysis. Even though I studied math in college, I forgot some of it since I did not have a place to store reference material (but I did find a replacement math book.) The replacement math book shows how to do things, and thus will allow me to re-learn the material.
That makes sense, but in the case of math, I've never seen a problem that couldn't eventually be broken down and solved (excluding problems that require information that was never covered in class or in available textbooks).
I was impressed with one that managed to make 0+0+0 = 180...
As you know, the angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees. By clicking on the exact same point three times, it would sum up the angles (in this case, an angle to an identical point is 0 defrees, and there are three of them), and since three points mean a triangle, 0 must equal 180.
Other than that, the program was mediocre. In general, you could learn how to solve its multiple-choice tests as it's wrong answers had only one difference from the correct answer. I can't give the name since it's been a while, but it was rated as Grade 7-9.
It's a downloadable add-on. You can choose nView, or any other download.
You can download either Cygwin, MiniGW, or the MSVC Compiler Toolkit (along with the Platform SDK).
Besides - porting system-specific code from one compiler to another is always difficult. As an example, try porting "Fortune" to Windows. This will require some cheap and quick hacks, since function prototypes in the main C files use system-specific features.
The only thing you will miss out with the toolkit is the MFC and ATL - something that can be implemented by the user.
Searching for files is done by pressing Winkey-F. If you need to hunt down specific files by another special search creiteria, you can click one of the search options. If you need greater control over that, then you probably need a better organization system.
These problems are usually associated with improperly written software. They can occurr under Linux as well - although in that OS, there are some programs that unconditionally refuse to run as root (without reason.)
The biggest culprits are copy-protection systems for video games, and installation of new programs.
That is correct - although this is generally caused by company rivalry.
Settings -> Control Panel -> Administrative Tools -> Computer Management -> Storage -> Disk Management -> Right Click F: -> Change Drive Letter and Paths.
BTW, a properly configured application/project doesn't use hard-coded paths. I'm not sure how do use relative paths instead, but I have no problem when I move project folders around
In any case, both Windows and Linux are primitive. They still have a legacy base that keep on coming back from the graveyard (e.g. Dos drive letters, or Unix man pages.) The only way to fix this problem is to redesign a new operating system from scratch - good luck getting market penetration since neither OS/2 or Beos are around anymore.
The same reason you parition (or split) your Linux filesystem so that
In Windows XP, you can partition your HD so that you can store your base OS on drive 1, store your apps/games/movies on drive 2, and your work stuff on drive 3. (Of course, you want to hide your games, so you have to put it in a directory called "Dos" to prevent wives/parents from snooping.)
It seems to be taken for granted that this is a weakness of the operating system.
Mission critical systems normally procure their products directly from the manufacturer, or from a known reseller of the manufacturer - in either case, something that is known and trusted. In addition, for a new supplier, they will generally perform rigerous testing on the product.
This procedure alone stops all but the most experienced of counterfeiters, as mission critical systems need to build up a pattern of trust beforehand.
For regular service, counterfeiters can go in just fine by creating medium quality products. I know one government organization that got burnt by counterfeit network cards - while the cards individually met the specification, they were all cloned with identical MAC addresses.
Doom, when compared to Wolf3D, is considered better because of improved Mod support and graphics. The game was better because you could actually strafe - but it still had problems of an elementry grade FPS (with strafe-running and such).
Quake, when compared to Doom, is considered better because of improved Mod support and graphics. The game itself was just as mediocre as Doom, perhaps worse, since you could fly through the monsters much more easily. (Especially on Nightmare mode.)
Quake 2, when compared to Quake, is considred better because of improved Mod support and graphics. The game itself was just as mediocre as Quake, but at least there was a better illusion of intellegence. (Hard+ difficulty wasn't different than Hard.)
Quake 3, when compared to Quake 2, is considered better because of improved Mod Support and graphics. The game itself simply relied on multiplayer and mod support.
Doom 3, when compared to Quake 3, creates the exact same reasoning. Any expectations that came from the game was hyped by the customers, not the developers.
When was the last time iD Software released a *good* game? Not at all - they are engine developers, not game programmers. Any game released with their engine is simply good enough to demonstrate their engine so that other developers can purchase a licence and make a better product.
Epic did the same thing with its Unreal engine - some of their latest installments (UT2K3 and UT2K4) may be mediocre but the engine itself is extremely popular.