I'm no apple fan boy. The ipod, the iphone and the ipad were instant market owner products that did nothing that wasn't done before by others. They just executed better. Nobody's perfect but they nailed the 3 most important consumer electronics devices in modern history. If that isn't textbook execution, then the term has no meaning. I've never owned any the above mentioned devices, and I had a cheepo mac book pro that I got refurbished from apple because I figured getting a used machine from them would be good value. I don't use it anymore because I can't stand the desktop environment. But credit where its it do. They because one the 'big' 3 or 4 or whatever on the back of their execution. Nothing to do with fanboyism.
This news would have been really interesting were Jobs at the helm because he'd established a track record for nearly perfect execution and you could bank on that the final product would be polished. Apple has done nothing in the Cook era to suggest that we can rely on that any more. That said it would be nice if Apple put out something novel.
You quoted his conclusion but completely ignored his reasoning. He tied it to a lack of viable testing which is the only method of establishing scientific truth (for some value of truth, see K. Popper). The various paths of scientific inquiry have varying degrees of epistemological weight, and some do in fact push the limits of what can be properly considered science. For some reason, it is the branches that are the lowest on the epistemological spectrum that are the most political in nature. Philosophy has been dead for a generation or two, so the modern educated man cannot fathom why so many people refuse to treat climate science with the same deference as they treat physics, and the skeptics don't have the mental framework to describe the deficiency. In the end you have a lot people who are very clever but completely full of shit, but do not know it and don't have the mental where with all to ever figure it out.
It certainly doesn't help, that you have a large group of mentally ill fanatics who spend time down-voting comments that go against the Good and the True, while healthy people with common sense recoil at the behavior, which creates out of every public forum where clever people might aggregate, echo chambers for insanity.
A generation ago it was common. Know a 70 year old man, who was hired as a programmer for TWA back in the day. He had hardly touched a computer before he was hired but came highly recommended and made a good impression at the interview. He was put in a training program, he wore a trainee badge and in a matter of time he was trained in and he went on to have a lucrative career in software development. This was back in the days, that the TWAs of the world had their own home-rolled everything and there truly was a 'talent' shortage in software, so they had not illusions of unicorn candidates coming in and hitting the ground running...
Wow, if reversing a linked list or distinguishing between swap and virtual memory is the hold up..well then that isn't exactly rocket science so develop a training program.
Bottom line it is that corporate America has had to deal with talent shortages before, and the tried and true solutions has always been training.
The President of the United States, the Commander and Chief of her armed forces, does not pardon treason, the proffering of her most valuable intelligence secrets to the rest of the world, including her bitter enemies during what may well be considered a time of war.
And Snowden may well have done a good thing, but it is a complex judgement call and it isn't the role of the Executive authority of the United States of America to answer that question. Obama the person may be sympathetic, but to parley into a Presidential pardon is the act of a philosopher king, and and arrogant betrayal of duty and pubic trust.
He did what he did out of conviction. He needs to suffer the consequences.
When they came up with don't be evil, I think they meant it in good faith, it was naive and it was impossible, like pacts to be best friends forever, but at some level the people at the top there believed in this with respect to their muddled conception of evil.
So this is disappointing. Nexus was at the very least a huge bone to the tech community, and was pretty much the last man standing against a snowcrash vision of the mobile space. It was rooting friendly, and the majority of users kept it hooked into google services anyways.
So now yeah, they will end this because while a rooting friendly, stock android, top of the line, phone may be a service to the tech community or even to modern humanity itself, it isn't strictly in Google's interests so they will squash it. I am waiting for the day when all phones will be rooting hostile, and for the day that they get really good at enforcing that.
But in the grand scheme of things, maybe this is trivial in comparison to the evil that is silicon valley's increasing interest in using their gate-keeping positions to control/advance political/social narratives and affect elections.
No there's no equivalence, it's like a clinically retarded evil gorilla in a world of ants stomping on competent evil ant, because he's an ant not because he's evil. The former can destroy the world, in which the latter is but a role player. Seriously. It's fucking Europe against a company.
It's all about a cut. A continental gangster. Be afraid.
I don't disagree with you, but think you are overstating the case. There are swaths of society who want to watch precisely what you described. I don't know how things actually work in Hollywood management, but my starting assumption is that in the aggregate they want make the most money they can, which means that at base producers are procuring works and producing works they believe will attract the most viewers. They may live in a bubble and have some serious misconceptions, I will continue to maintain that assumption and explain away evidence to the contrary because to me, that is still the strongest underlying theory as to how things work there. But that's the tempest in the teapot, because whatever it is, whether Hollywood is a proxy for what the country in the aggregate wants to see or whether is reflective merely of what the producers want to see, the implication of Government studies into that is as I described, which is my main point because frankly I don't care much about my understanding of Hollywood or Hollywood per se.
But now that we're here, I'd ask you to consider a point just a bit deeper with respect to Hollywood output.
Why are all the men and woman in the movies attractive to the agree of x, why is there love interest in every single movie. I don't watch movies, so I can't really get more detailed but I believe that if you are willing to examine the output just a bit more closely you will find elements that are there precisely because that's what they believe we want to see.
'Not at all' is as naive as your depiction of my belief:
"Hollywood creates movies based on a democratic and unbiased worldview of the aggregate U.S. viewing public"
That's an overstatement. Hollywood is in the aggregate trying to get people to watch. There output is a model. Not perfect or even very good, but that's what it is. Government has no legitimate mandate to be 'studying' it.
You are right. We can only with with models and proxies. What Hollywood believes people want to to see in the aggregate is probably the best model we have for what people want to see. They have the most data, and the most interest and the most experience in that field of inquiry. Yes, they do their pet projects, but those projects probably more closely track the views of our enlightened betters in D.C.
But the point is the same, this government mission to bring the governed in line with the prevailing notion of the good and the true espoused by those who pull its levers is the core driver behind behind a progression that may wind us up in an a tyranny. Can you see a progressive supreme court striking down laws/executive-actions/administrative curtailments of media out of line with progressive ethos? I don't. We see this stuff and it's just par for the course--yeah government studying society to figure out how to bring us into line -- ho hum, progress....
Google does what they want, they are a company and pursue what they perceive as their interests (the sick bastards), but government involvement is disturbing as it simply points, yet again..., to an entity that is so far beyond any conceivable mandate that we are dealing with a pure instrument of power, and we better hope the wrong people don't get at the levers (...)
Because here is the rub: Hollywood depiction of women is, in the aggregate, whatever the fuck the movie watching wants it be, generally, so the notion that the government need understand this, with a mind to reason about how to govern it, is nothing short of the government taking it on itself to affect the governed so as to bring them in line with what they who pull the levers of power hold as the good and true.
The republic is over. The branch of Government which most closely tracks the will of the people (Congress) is declining in power, and we are a couple of supreme court justices away from an unchecked progressive tyranny.
WTF you have to be a twit to expect that out of 40 million people 0 will do something stupid while x for almost all values of x. There are laws codifying the natural law requiring one to drive safely. The onus is on the driver to navigate the big bad world out there in ways consistent with their natural responsibilities. It is draconian to require that creators take into account all possible misuses of their creations and means nothing more than that we can't have nice things.
This is line with the increasing ability for modern man to justify any and every curtailment of human agency in the name of some social good; it's come to the point where modern people hold that the price of living in a society is the abdication of all individual agency. We are pining for Big Brother.
This means there needs to be more laws to limit human agency. Governments were instituted among men to solve all problems, it says so in the constitution. There isn't a problem that a judicious law can't solve. Let's do this!
you can't, but you can get hired, at least for now. Then if you wish you can read a algo_ds textbook and an OS text book, and after about two years you are at par with a standard graduate.
the bootcamps do what tons of theory cannot, namely, get you enough hands on to hit a entry level job running. While it lasts it's a great thing, as you can take your severance and re-tool and get into a new thing in a matter of months.
the ruby track isn't hiring anymore. the js guys however are still getting hired. one of the 3 guys I know who went to bootcamps and got hired did one for Ruby but now works in the JS world. All 3 have progressed in their knowledge. You don't stop learning when you leave the bootcamp and get hired. That's what slashdot doesn't seem to get. It's just gets you a foot in the door, then you start learning on someone elses dime. it's been a great deal, but the ROI is declining.
There are some in NY that take a percentage out of the first year's salary and no tuition. have a friend who went to one of them and it worked for him, but they are selective. The better boot camps (per my research YMMV) are full time an on-site because your literally writing code with mentors and peers for crazy hours. They probably do more coding in a month or do than a working coder will do in 5 or 6. At some point, though the starting salary will go from 60-80 to 35-50, no doubt about it. It's the new office work.
Well your taking a lot of heat, but I am a member of a large community and personally know 3 young men who went to boot camp and were hired immediately after leaving, and now after a job switch (or two) are making low six figures (in NY). Front end is very hot, now, and these guys are getting hired. They're all smart and really motivated self-learners and--this is a slashdot blindspot--they do not stop learning once they leave the bootcamp, they just learn on and off the job. There are tons of books out there to learn anything you want, and there's nothing stopping any of these guys from picking up a dusty copy of sedgwick and learning a llinearithmic search algorithm. Classic overestimation the difficulty of ones own occupation. The bootcamp just teaches you enough and gives you enough hands on to be useful day one on kinds of jobs that are available in gobs. Any of these guys can take PSD and create HTML/CSS/JS representation using a number of popular frameworks (that save time, which the jobs require) and the one I know can create and tie into a basic backend. They aren't getting hired and google or facebook but who outside of the special snowflakes who got to devote their entire selves for 8 years to maths and engineering in 50k per annum highschools and unis, are either.
And surprise, suprise, these guys don't stop learning and are able to move on from framework to framework as needed and you can read a lot books on your 100K per year salary if you think you need expert up at lower levels of abstraction.
It's a good deal right now, though I am skeptical that it will be a good deal for very much longer.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm no apple fan boy. The ipod, the iphone and the ipad were instant market owner products that did nothing that wasn't done before by others. They just executed better. Nobody's perfect but they nailed the 3 most important consumer electronics devices in modern history. If that isn't textbook execution, then the term has no meaning. I've never owned any the above mentioned devices, and I had a cheepo mac book pro that I got refurbished from apple because I figured getting a used machine from them would be good value. I don't use it anymore because I can't stand the desktop environment. But credit where its it do. They because one the 'big' 3 or 4 or whatever on the back of their execution. Nothing to do with fanboyism.
This news would have been really interesting were Jobs at the helm because he'd established a track record for nearly perfect execution and you could bank on that the final product would be polished. Apple has done nothing in the Cook era to suggest that we can rely on that any more. That said it would be nice if Apple put out something novel.
You quoted his conclusion but completely ignored his reasoning. He tied it to a lack of viable testing which is the only method of establishing scientific truth (for some value of truth, see K. Popper). The various paths of scientific inquiry have varying degrees of epistemological weight, and some do in fact push the limits of what can be properly considered science. For some reason, it is the branches that are the lowest on the epistemological spectrum that are the most political in nature. Philosophy has been dead for a generation or two, so the modern educated man cannot fathom why so many people refuse to treat climate science with the same deference as they treat physics, and the skeptics don't have the mental framework to describe the deficiency. In the end you have a lot people who are very clever but completely full of shit, but do not know it and don't have the mental where with all to ever figure it out.
It certainly doesn't help, that you have a large group of mentally ill fanatics who spend time down-voting comments that go against the Good and the True, while healthy people with common sense recoil at the behavior, which creates out of every public forum where clever people might aggregate, echo chambers for insanity.
Interesting times.
This.
A generation ago it was common. Know a 70 year old man, who was hired as a programmer for TWA back in the day. He had hardly touched a computer before he was hired but came highly recommended and made a good impression at the interview. He was put in a training program, he wore a trainee badge and in a matter of time he was trained in and he went on to have a lucrative career in software development. This was back in the days, that the TWAs of the world had their own home-rolled everything and there truly was a 'talent' shortage in software, so they had not illusions of unicorn candidates coming in and hitting the ground running...
Wow, if reversing a linked list or distinguishing between swap and virtual memory is the hold up..well then that isn't exactly rocket science so develop a training program.
Bottom line it is that corporate America has had to deal with talent shortages before, and the tried and true solutions has always been training.
mistaken mod
The President of the United States, the Commander and Chief of her armed forces, does not pardon treason, the proffering of her most valuable intelligence secrets to the rest of the world, including her bitter enemies during what may well be considered a time of war.
And Snowden may well have done a good thing, but it is a complex judgement call and it isn't the role of the Executive authority of the United States of America to answer that question. Obama the person may be sympathetic, but to parley into a Presidential pardon is the act of a philosopher king, and and arrogant betrayal of duty and pubic trust.
He did what he did out of conviction. He needs to suffer the consequences.
The issue is for history to decide.
1940.
We're also more intelligent, attractive and funny.
Yeah, it's just a name change: http://www.theverge.com/2016/6...
When they came up with don't be evil, I think they meant it in good faith, it was naive and it was impossible, like pacts to be best friends forever, but at some level the people at the top there believed in this with respect to their muddled conception of evil.
So this is disappointing. Nexus was at the very least a huge bone to the tech community, and was pretty much the last man standing against a snowcrash vision of the mobile space. It was rooting friendly, and the majority of users kept it hooked into google services anyways.
So now yeah, they will end this because while a rooting friendly, stock android, top of the line, phone may be a service to the tech community or even to modern humanity itself, it isn't strictly in Google's interests so they will squash it. I am waiting for the day when all phones will be rooting hostile, and for the day that they get really good at enforcing that.
But in the grand scheme of things, maybe this is trivial in comparison to the evil that is silicon valley's increasing interest in using their gate-keeping positions to control/advance political/social narratives and affect elections.
that was pretty cool.
No there's no equivalence, it's like a clinically retarded evil gorilla in a world of ants stomping on competent evil ant, because he's an ant not because he's evil. The former can destroy the world, in which the latter is but a role player. Seriously. It's fucking Europe against a company.
It's all about a cut. A continental gangster. Be afraid.
oh missed the last sentence, never mind ...
Your're not from NY are you?
I don't disagree with you, but think you are overstating the case. There are swaths of society who want to watch precisely what you described. I don't know how things actually work in Hollywood management, but my starting assumption is that in the aggregate they want make the most money they can, which means that at base producers are procuring works and producing works they believe will attract the most viewers. They may live in a bubble and have some serious misconceptions, I will continue to maintain that assumption and explain away evidence to the contrary because to me, that is still the strongest underlying theory as to how things work there. But that's the tempest in the teapot, because whatever it is, whether Hollywood is a proxy for what the country in the aggregate wants to see or whether is reflective merely of what the producers want to see, the implication of Government studies into that is as I described, which is my main point because frankly I don't care much about my understanding of Hollywood or Hollywood per se.
But now that we're here, I'd ask you to consider a point just a bit deeper with respect to Hollywood output.
Why are all the men and woman in the movies attractive to the agree of x, why is there love interest in every single movie. I don't watch movies, so I can't really get more detailed but I believe that if you are willing to examine the output just a bit more closely you will find elements that are there precisely because that's what they believe we want to see.
'Not at all' is as naive as your depiction of my belief:
"Hollywood creates movies based on a democratic and unbiased worldview of the aggregate U.S. viewing public"
That's an overstatement. Hollywood is in the aggregate trying to get people to watch. There output is a model. Not perfect or even very good, but that's what it is. Government has no legitimate mandate to be 'studying' it.
You are right. We can only with with models and proxies. What Hollywood believes people want to to see in the aggregate is probably the best model we have for what people want to see. They have the most data, and the most interest and the most experience in that field of inquiry. Yes, they do their pet projects, but those projects probably more closely track the views of our enlightened betters in D.C.
But the point is the same, this government mission to bring the governed in line with the prevailing notion of the good and the true espoused by those who pull its levers is the core driver behind behind a progression that may wind us up in an a tyranny. Can you see a progressive supreme court striking down laws/executive-actions/administrative curtailments of media out of line with progressive ethos? I don't. We see this stuff and it's just par for the course--yeah government studying society to figure out how to bring us into line -- ho hum, progress....
Google does what they want, they are a company and pursue what they perceive as their interests (the sick bastards), but government involvement is disturbing as it simply points, yet again..., to an entity that is so far beyond any conceivable mandate that we are dealing with a pure instrument of power, and we better hope the wrong people don't get at the levers (...)
Because here is the rub: Hollywood depiction of women is, in the aggregate, whatever the fuck the movie watching wants it be, generally, so the notion that the government need understand this, with a mind to reason about how to govern it, is nothing short of the government taking it on itself to affect the governed so as to bring them in line with what they who pull the levers of power hold as the good and true.
The republic is over. The branch of Government which most closely tracks the will of the people (Congress) is declining in power, and we are a couple of supreme court justices away from an unchecked progressive tyranny.
You been waiting how long to make that comment, really...
WTF you have to be a twit to expect that out of 40 million people 0 will do something stupid while x for almost all values of x. There are laws codifying the natural law requiring one to drive safely. The onus is on the driver to navigate the big bad world out there in ways consistent with their natural responsibilities. It is draconian to require that creators take into account all possible misuses of their creations and means nothing more than that we can't have nice things.
This is line with the increasing ability for modern man to justify any and every curtailment of human agency in the name of some social good; it's come to the point where modern people hold that the price of living in a society is the abdication of all individual agency. We are pining for Big Brother.
This means there needs to be more laws to limit human agency. Governments were instituted among men to solve all problems, it says so in the constitution. There isn't a problem that a judicious law can't solve. Let's do this!
you can't, but you can get hired, at least for now. Then if you wish you can read a algo_ds textbook and an OS text book, and after about two years you are at par with a standard graduate.
the bootcamps do what tons of theory cannot, namely, get you enough hands on to hit a entry level job running. While it lasts it's a great thing, as you can take your severance and re-tool and get into a new thing in a matter of months.
the ruby track isn't hiring anymore. the js guys however are still getting hired. one of the 3 guys I know who went to bootcamps and got hired did one for Ruby but now works in the JS world. All 3 have progressed in their knowledge. You don't stop learning when you leave the bootcamp and get hired. That's what slashdot doesn't seem to get. It's just gets you a foot in the door, then you start learning on someone elses dime. it's been a great deal, but the ROI is declining.
There are some in NY that take a percentage out of the first year's salary and no tuition. have a friend who went to one of them and it worked for him, but they are selective. The better boot camps (per my research YMMV) are full time an on-site because your literally writing code with mentors and peers for crazy hours. They probably do more coding in a month or do than a working coder will do in 5 or 6. At some point, though the starting salary will go from 60-80 to 35-50, no doubt about it. It's the new office work.
Well your taking a lot of heat, but I am a member of a large community and personally know 3 young men who went to boot camp and were hired immediately after leaving, and now after a job switch (or two) are making low six figures (in NY). Front end is very hot, now, and these guys are getting hired. They're all smart and really motivated self-learners and--this is a slashdot blindspot--they do not stop learning once they leave the bootcamp, they just learn on and off the job. There are tons of books out there to learn anything you want, and there's nothing stopping any of these guys from picking up a dusty copy of sedgwick and learning a llinearithmic search algorithm. Classic overestimation the difficulty of ones own occupation. The bootcamp just teaches you enough and gives you enough hands on to be useful day one on kinds of jobs that are available in gobs. Any of these guys can take PSD and create HTML/CSS/JS representation using a number of popular frameworks (that save time, which the jobs require) and the one I know can create and tie into a basic backend. They aren't getting hired and google or facebook but who outside of the special snowflakes who got to devote their entire selves for 8 years to maths and engineering in 50k per annum highschools and unis, are either.
And surprise, suprise, these guys don't stop learning and are able to move on from framework to framework as needed and you can read a lot books on your 100K per year salary if you think you need expert up at lower levels of abstraction.
It's a good deal right now, though I am skeptical that it will be a good deal for very much longer.