At very least, start documenting new stuff via a wiki, before new commits get integrated. Better yet, documenting a new feature BEFORE coding it can increase quality and reduce development time by causing developers to think through the user experience before implementing something.
We also have our support and and customer service people copy/paste emailed answers to the documentation wiki so they aren't typing the same thing repeatedly and the information can be found without emailing support in the future. That doesn't require writing any more documentation, just copying and pasting info you're already writing.
You really do need to initially invest in building some community, if you want a community who will provide bug fixes and new features for you. It doesn't need to be a large community. Two or three or other companies / developers using the software, sharing development costs, can make a big difference. That can provide the critical mass to keep the project going and attract occasional contributors.
My primary job is working on specific open source software. The larger framework is used by many organizations. Some modules are used by three to five organizations. If three other organizations are using it and helping with development, that's a lot of work I don't have to do.
A couple of words went missing from my post, such the sentence you quoted didn't end up meaning what I intended to say
> steam from one reactor core piped to different turbines
I did NOT intend to say that steam from one reactor should be piped to multiple turbines. As you indicate, that could well create additional, unnecessary complexity.
What I intended to say is that you should be able to replace or service the turbine module without digging into the reactor cite module, because they are connected only at limited points. If you've worked on cars much, you may have spent 30 minutes replacing a water pump on an old truck, and six hours replacing a water pump on a newer car. That's what I was talking about, but missing words garbled my message. Clear lines of separation between different modules, with well-defined connections between them, should make maintenance simpler and faster.
Sorry about the dictionary shit, but you still kept on about "lots of little reactors" being a bad idea after I stated plainly that I wasn't suggesting such a thing.
> Big turbines with lots of high pressure steam get the job done far better than little ones. Of course you could have something like a lot of little pebble bed reactors
Modular noun something, as a house or piece of furniture, built or organized in self-contained units or sections. http://dictionary.reference.co...
Modularity has nothing to do with big versus small. Think of a modular home for example, it's not made up of lots of little homes. Modular means steam from one reactor core piped to different turbines, for example, because the turbine attaches to the reactor core only at defined interface points, otherwise they are separate modules. Which means you can do maintenance on a turbine module without touching the reactor core.
> How does having a larger number of small reactors
He didn't say that. He said modular. As in, each turbine module should be separable from each reactor module. Within the reactor itself, you'd have separate modules that you could inspect or replace, rather than bringing the whole facility down for eight weeks. If you're looking at cooling issue, you take one cooling module down at a time rather than taking apart the whole facility.
Often, larger things are more modular, while smaller versions are built in one piece, so "more modular" certainly does not mean "smaller" or "a larger quanity of".
You're right, mdsolar seems to have submitted something that isn't outright propaganda. It IS about precautions regarding a potential flaw with the UK's reactor design, so in that sense it is "anti-nuke" and by extension "pro (md)solar", but it's largely objective and factual.
In the US at least, the word "elementary" means "elementary school" 95% of the time, so that's the association I have with the word "elementary". I'm sure I'm not the only one. It doesn't look like it's actually designed for children, so why in the world would they use that name. Might as well call it Kindergarten OS or Playskool OS.
If it did, that would take care of half of my bugs. Within a 30-minute period, I might well work in PHP, Perl, ActionScript, JavaScript, and some other language. A large portion of my errors are things like using empty() in JavaScript. Especially, ActionScript is almost the same as JavaScript, and a lot of Perl is also valid PHP, so when switching between these it's easy to absent-mindedly tap out a line in the wrong language.
Once upon a time, I used vim syntax highlighting, which doesn't typically catch using the right syntax, but the wrong function name, but does make missed braces and such obvious. Maybe I should right a vim plugin for "wrong language, dummy." It would look for echo (phph vs print (Perl), etc.
Many bugs are of course a simple "oops"or "l forgot that. I knew, and it slipped my mind".
Another very large portion are cases where they think they know exactly what they are doing, but in fact they are in way over their head. Many, many times I've pointed out a bug and had the developer argue with me, even after I showed them the problem. I have to actually crash/exploit their application before they change it, while still arguing "an attacker would never think of that." Dude, the attacker doesn't even have to THINK of it, that attack is automatically attempted by his web crawler because it's so obvious and so common.
Or: Hmm, this page takes 40 seconds to load. Would it work better to do $long_operation OUTSIDThe loop? No, no way that would make a difference. 10 minutes later... Here, I tried it outside the loop. It runs 400 times faster.
That one good thing is that each developer will only argue with me once or twice. When I make a suggestion, I politely ask about trying it a different way. When you argue, I prove clearly how incredibly wrong you are. It's easier to just accept that when I say something, I'm probably right. That's actually NOT because I'm necessarily right more often than anyone else. I've just learned to keep my mouth shut if I don't know. I only say something when I know it to be true.
It's kind of funny that I've gotten a reputation like I know everything, like I can solve any problem. In fact, 95% of the time I have nothing intelligent to say. So I don't say anything. It's a good way to avoid saying anything stupid.
I've been coding, and studying to improve my skills, for decades. People come to me for help and advice. With one open source project I work on, all code must be approved by at least three people. My counterpart for one module is also very experienced, and a perfectionist. Sometimes our egos collide, but when we get past that we come up with something much better than either of us started with. That's particularly good when we're working on an architecture or API that otter people will have to code to in the future.
> The owners/high-level executives have too much control over the process of wage/bonus distribution. It's like passing around a bag with money (profits), and the owners/executives get to pull as much out as they want first.
You know of course that companies frequently lose money in one quarter or one year, and make money another year. So owners may or may not get ANY money this year. Employees get paid every month, precisely the amount they expect. That's because the money bag goes in the opposite direction. First, production employees get paid (payroll). Executives get a portion of their pay. If there's money left, executives get their bonus, which is the other half of their pay. If there's still money left, investments are made to prepare the company for the future. If there's STILL money left, owners get some, in the form of dividends. Dividends (owner's) are, by law, the very last thing that gets paid.
Sounds like you need a better one. We've been very pleased with Blue Cross / Blue Shield of Texas for insurance and Scott and White for healthcare. Obviously there are things that need to be improved with the entire systems of a) health insurance and especially b) health care. Given the available options (worldwide), this combination is hard to beat. If you happen to be in Texas and aren't happy with what you're getting, they are worth a look. If you aren't in Texas, and all of the options in your state suck, I'd be curious to know what causes the difference.
For clarification, the system requirements for Windows 9 developer preview are already known, so the "next version of Windows" for which we don't know the minimum hardware requirements is Windows 10, correct?
It would be funny if instead of "10" they used the Roman numeral X for the Windows OS, so Windows OS X.
Just like I'm also the CEO of Microsoft, and the president of the United States.
If you'd read half of my posts that you replied to, you'd know exactly who I am. I talk about my work all the damn time on Slashdot.
How about you. We know who you are. You post unwanted promotional messages. Unwanted promotional messages are spam. You are therefore a spammer. Advertisers are annoying, but pay for free sites like this one. Spammers are much, much, worse. Their (your) messages are neither wanted on the site nor have the redeeming value of paying for the site. Spammers, like you, are just parasitic scum.
As the sentence you quoted indicated, it's inexpensive enough in the US that we continue to provide it for employees who work less than three hours per week, so....
At the price we pay, those employees can normally see a doctor the same day rather than waiting weeks for an appointment.
You actually have a good point. If someone wants to hire me, they can pay my price, or I can choose not to work for them. If I don't want to pay for NFL tickets, or NFL Network, I can simply choose not to do so. I have no right to force them to work at a price I set.
That said, the FCC doesn't need to enforce this rule. The NFL can negotiate with the teams and the TV stations. The government doesn't need to do the NFL' s dirty work for them.
Well you can make up your own definitions of words if you want to, I guess. My "hobby", as you call it, has brought in over a million dollars. That million has been used according to the company's mission statement.
You know, people actually write down the purpose of the company when they create it. It's called a "mission statement". You might read some sometime. I've yet to see one that says "make money". I have seen a few companies where the people apparently FORGOT their mission, forgot the reason the company was started, and started focusing on money instead. That's why you put the mission statement in prominent places - posted on the wall, on banners, etc - to remind people of why you're there lest they forget.
> I'd bet that any Intel version of Windows Microsoft releases in the next 10, possibly 15 years will still run on it.
I'll take that bet. With just 1-2 GB of RAM, the CURRENT version of Windows will install, but not really run, on it. $10 says the next version won't even install?
Oh, so you're saying Apple's upgrade prices, which range from free to $30, are more than the $1,299 / year that Red Hat charges? https://www.redhat.com/wapps/s...
> It's not about who is dispensable or not, companies do not exist to hire people...
For many years I worked for a corporation that was set up primarily for the purpose of hiring people and taking care of those employees. For the last 12 months, the company has been losing money by continuing to provide health insurance and such for employees who work fewer than 12 hours per month.
You may think that's incredibly unusual, but actually it's not because many, possibly most, corporations are set up for the purpose of hiring a very small number of people, most notably the owners. There have been many times over the last 20 years when I, as the sole shareholder, have needed to choose between making more money or doing more good for the employees and customers. I decided that money is a means to an end. The PURPOSE if making more money would be in order to better take care of the people I care about. I'd like more money because it would allow me to send my daughter to a better school. I'd like more money because it would allow me to give more to my employees and other friends. I'd like more money because it would allow me to give more to organizations such as United Way and the Crisis Pregnancy Center. Choosing between being good to people or making more money, I choose doing good because after all the whole point of more money would be to do good with it. Choosing more money would be putting the means ahead of the ends.
That's completely false. You just made that up out of thin air.
Customers can, as I did, upgrade from Leopard (2007) to the newest version at a cost of $0. Upgrading from Vista to Windows 8.1 would cost $120 - $320. (Plus the cost of upgrades to Outlook, etc.)
Customers could also choose to upgrade at each step, paying $30, $20, and $0 for Mac - a total of $50. With Windows, the analogous path would be Vista - Win7 - Win8 - Win8, which could cost over $800, depending on which edition of Windows. In what world is $50 more than $800?
I'm on the technical side. Marketing and especially advertising annoys me greatly. My experience is primary in prevention and incident response for web server security. So finding and eliminating potential risks. "Security researcher" might emplo imply actually developing specific exploits, whereas I'd sanitize and bind all input, not often spending time developing a specific injection string.
I've tried to get a breadth of relevant experience, though. My time working as a locksmith informs my info sec work, I've been a licensed private investigator, I'm licensed as a security officer, etc. Same on the code side - programming microcontrollers a little bit gives an appreciation for timing attacks, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
> Did our jets get faster and lighter and cheaper?
Yes. Especially lighter and cheaper PER PASSENGER, which is the goal for passenger jets.
> it still takes the same amount of energy to fly across the Atlantic.
Nope, fuel efficiency and energy efficiency have improved significantly.
Bettridge's law says no.
Moore's law says yes.
In the battle of the eponymous laws, which law rules supreme? Find out in this week's epoch TFA.
At very least, start documenting new stuff via a wiki, before new commits get integrated. Better yet, documenting a new feature BEFORE coding it can increase quality and reduce development time by causing developers to think through the user experience before implementing something.
We also have our support and and customer service people copy/paste emailed answers to the documentation wiki so they aren't typing the same thing repeatedly and the information can be found without emailing support in the future. That doesn't require writing any more documentation, just copying and pasting info you're already writing.
You really do need to initially invest in building some community, if you want a community who will provide bug fixes and new features for you. It doesn't need to be a large community. Two or three or other companies / developers using the software, sharing development costs, can make a big difference. That can provide the critical mass to keep the project going and attract occasional contributors.
My primary job is working on specific open source software. The larger framework is used by many organizations. Some modules are used by three to five organizations. If three other organizations are using it and helping with development, that's a lot of work I don't have to do.
A couple of words went missing from my post, such the sentence you quoted didn't end up meaning what I intended to say
> steam from one reactor core piped to different turbines
I did NOT intend to say that steam from one reactor should be piped to multiple turbines. As you indicate, that could well create additional, unnecessary complexity.
What I intended to say is that you should be able to replace or service the turbine module without digging into the reactor cite module, because they are connected only at limited points. If you've worked on cars much, you may have spent 30 minutes replacing a water pump on an old truck, and six hours replacing a water pump on a newer car. That's what I was talking about, but missing words garbled my message. Clear lines of separation between different modules, with well-defined connections between them, should make maintenance simpler and faster.
Sorry about the dictionary shit, but you still kept on about "lots of little reactors" being a bad idea after I stated plainly that I wasn't suggesting such a thing.
> Big turbines with lots of high pressure steam get the job done far better than little ones. Of course you could have something like a lot of little pebble bed reactors
Modular
noun
something, as a house or piece of furniture, built or organized in self-contained units or sections.
http://dictionary.reference.co...
Modularity has nothing to do with big versus small. Think of a modular home for example, it's not made up of lots of little homes. Modular means steam from one reactor core piped to different turbines, for example, because the turbine attaches to the reactor core only at defined interface points, otherwise they are separate modules. Which means you can do maintenance on a turbine module without touching the reactor core.
> How does having a larger number of small reactors
He didn't say that. He said modular. As in, each turbine module should be separable from each reactor module. Within the reactor itself, you'd have separate modules that you could inspect or replace, rather than bringing the whole facility down for eight weeks. If you're looking at cooling issue, you take one cooling module down at a time rather than taking apart the whole facility.
Often, larger things are more modular, while smaller versions are built in one piece, so "more modular" certainly does not mean "smaller" or "a larger quanity of".
You're right, mdsolar seems to have submitted something that isn't outright propaganda. It IS about precautions regarding a potential flaw with the UK's reactor design, so in that sense it is "anti-nuke" and by extension "pro (md)solar", but it's largely objective and factual.
In the US at least, the word "elementary" means "elementary school" 95% of the time, so that's the association I have with the word "elementary". I'm sure I'm not the only one. It doesn't look like it's actually designed for children, so why in the world would they use that name. Might as well call it Kindergarten OS or Playskool OS.
It doesn't do what the summary says.
If it did, that would take care of half of my bugs. Within a 30-minute period, I might well work in PHP, Perl, ActionScript, JavaScript, and some other language. A large portion of my errors are things like using empty() in JavaScript. Especially, ActionScript is almost the same as JavaScript, and a lot of Perl is also valid PHP, so when switching between these it's easy to absent-mindedly tap out a line in the wrong language.
Once upon a time, I used vim syntax highlighting, which doesn't typically catch using the right syntax, but the wrong function name, but does make missed braces and such obvious. Maybe I should right a vim plugin for "wrong language, dummy." It would look for echo (phph vs print (Perl), etc.
Many bugs are of course a simple "oops"or "l forgot that. I knew, and it slipped my mind".
Another very large portion are cases where they think they know exactly what they are doing, but in fact they are in way over their head. Many, many times I've pointed out a bug and had the developer argue with me, even after I showed them the problem. I have to actually crash/exploit their application before they change it, while still arguing "an attacker would never think of that." Dude, the attacker doesn't even have to THINK of it, that attack is automatically attempted by his web crawler because it's so obvious and so common.
Or: ...
Hmm, this page takes 40 seconds to load. Would it work better to do $long_operation OUTSIDThe loop?
No, no way that would make a difference.
10 minutes later
Here, I tried it outside the loop. It runs 400 times faster.
That one good thing is that each developer will only argue with me once or twice. When I make a suggestion, I politely ask about trying it a different way. When you argue, I prove clearly how incredibly wrong you are. It's easier to just accept that when I say something, I'm probably right. That's actually NOT because I'm necessarily right more often than anyone else. I've just learned to keep my mouth shut if I don't know. I only say something when I know it to be true.
It's kind of funny that I've gotten a reputation like I know everything, like I can solve any problem. In fact, 95% of the time I have nothing intelligent to say. So I don't say anything. It's a good way to avoid saying anything stupid.
I've been coding, and studying to improve my skills, for decades. People come to me for help and advice. With one open source project I work on, all code must be approved by at least three people. My counterpart for one module is also very experienced, and a perfectionist. Sometimes our egos collide, but when we get past that we come up with something much better than either of us started with. That's particularly good when we're working on an architecture or API that otter people will have to code to in the future.
> The owners/high-level executives have too much control over the process of wage/bonus distribution. It's like passing around a bag with money (profits), and the owners/executives get to pull as much out as they want first.
You know of course that companies frequently lose money in one quarter or one year, and make money another year. So owners may or may not get ANY money this year. Employees get paid every month, precisely the amount they expect. That's because the money bag goes in the opposite direction. First, production employees get paid (payroll). Executives get a portion of their pay. If there's money left, executives get their bonus, which is the other half of their pay. If there's still money left, investments are made to prepare the company for the future. If there's STILL money left, owners get some, in the form of dividends. Dividends (owner's) are, by law, the very last thing that gets paid.
Sounds like you need a better one. We've been very pleased with Blue Cross / Blue Shield of Texas for insurance and Scott and White for healthcare.
Obviously there are things that need to be improved with the entire systems of a) health insurance and especially b) health care. Given the available options (worldwide), this combination is hard to beat. If you happen to be in Texas and aren't happy with what you're getting, they are worth a look. If you aren't in Texas, and all of the options in your state suck, I'd be curious to know what causes the difference.
For clarification, the system requirements for Windows 9 developer preview are already known, so the "next version of Windows" for which we don't know the minimum hardware requirements is Windows 10, correct?
It would be funny if instead of "10" they used the Roman numeral X for the Windows OS, so Windows OS X.
Yeah, sure I'm the CTO of Clickbank. I'm all 296 people on Linked In named Ray Morris.
https://www.linkedin.com/vsear...
Just like I'm also the CEO of Microsoft, and the president of the United States.
If you'd read half of my posts that you replied to, you'd know exactly who I am. I talk about my work all the damn time on Slashdot.
How about you. We know who you are. You post unwanted promotional messages. Unwanted promotional messages are spam. You are therefore a spammer. Advertisers are annoying, but pay for free sites like this one. Spammers are much, much, worse. Their (your) messages are neither wanted on the site nor have the redeeming value of paying for the site. Spammers, like you, are just parasitic scum.
As the sentence you quoted indicated, it's inexpensive enough in the US that we continue to provide it for employees who work less than three hours per week, so ....
At the price we pay, those employees can normally see a doctor the same day rather than waiting weeks for an appointment.
You actually have a good point. If someone wants to hire me, they can pay my price, or I can choose not to work for them. If I don't want to pay for NFL tickets, or NFL Network, I can simply choose not to do so. I have no right to force them to work at a price I set.
That said, the FCC doesn't need to enforce this rule. The NFL can negotiate with the teams and the TV stations. The government doesn't need to do the NFL' s dirty work for them.
Well you can make up your own definitions of words if you want to, I guess.
My "hobby", as you call it, has brought in over a million dollars. That million has been used according to the company's mission statement.
You know, people actually write down the purpose of the company when they create it. It's called a "mission statement". You might read some sometime. I've yet to see one that says "make money". I have seen a few companies where the people apparently FORGOT their mission, forgot the reason the company was started, and started focusing on money instead. That's why you put the mission statement in prominent places - posted on the wall, on banners, etc - to remind people of why you're there lest they forget.
Have you not read any of my posts you've replied to?
My company does no advertising whatsoever. Since 1997, we've had all the work we can handle.
> I'd bet that any Intel version of Windows Microsoft releases in the next 10, possibly 15 years will still run on it.
I'll take that bet. With just 1-2 GB of RAM, the CURRENT version of Windows will install, but not really run, on it.
$10 says the next version won't even install?
Oh, so you're saying Apple's upgrade prices, which range from free to $30, are more than the $1,299 / year that Red Hat charges?
https://www.redhat.com/wapps/s...
Please return to first grade.
> It's not about who is dispensable or not, companies do not exist to hire people ...
For many years I worked for a corporation that was set up primarily for the purpose of hiring people and taking care of those employees. For the last 12 months, the company has been losing money by continuing to provide health insurance and such for employees who work fewer than 12 hours per month.
You may think that's incredibly unusual, but actually it's not because many, possibly most, corporations are set up for the purpose of hiring a very small number of people, most notably the owners. There have been many times over the last 20 years when I, as the sole shareholder, have needed to choose between making more money or doing more good for the employees and customers. I decided that money is a means to an end. The PURPOSE if making more money would be in order to better take care of the people I care about. I'd like more money because it would allow me to send my daughter to a better school. I'd like more money because it would allow me to give more to my employees and other friends. I'd like more money because it would allow me to give more to organizations such as United Way and the Crisis Pregnancy Center. Choosing between being good to people or making more money, I choose doing good because after all the whole point of more money would be to do good with it. Choosing more money would be putting the means ahead of the ends.
That's completely false. You just made that up out of thin air.
Customers can, as I did, upgrade from Leopard (2007) to the newest version at a cost of $0.
Upgrading from Vista to Windows 8.1 would cost $120 - $320. (Plus the cost of upgrades to Outlook, etc.)
Customers could also choose to upgrade at each step, paying $30, $20, and $0 for Mac - a total of $50.
With Windows, the analogous path would be Vista - Win7 - Win8 - Win8, which could cost over $800, depending on which edition of Windows. In what world is $50 more than $800?
I'm on the technical side. Marketing and especially advertising annoys me greatly. My experience is primary in prevention and incident response for web server security. So finding and eliminating potential risks. "Security researcher" might emplo imply actually developing specific exploits, whereas I'd sanitize and bind all input, not often spending time developing a specific injection string.
I've tried to get a breadth of relevant experience, though. My time working as a locksmith informs my info sec work, I've been a licensed private investigator, I'm licensed as a security officer, etc. Same on the code side - programming microcontrollers a little bit gives an appreciation for timing attacks, etc.
Why do you ask?
Thanks for that detailed information. I have another Java app that I use daily so optimizing the settings you mentioned might make a big difference.