While the number of years "in the industry" is mostly irrelevant, I'm only a few years shy of 30 - and I'd bet I have 1000x more customers using my "code" than you do. If you want to debate the further post as a non-AC or STFU (that's SHUT THE FUCK UP in case you aren't up on the recent lingo).
Welcome to the civilized world. It's entirely appropriate for the state to make sure the people who design our buildings and bridges, or who cut us open with surgical instruments, or who fly us from city to city in jumbo jets are actually qualified to do so.
Are you doing any of those things? No? Then your "examples" are irrelevant.
And yet, you were the one complaining that Tim Cook had the audacity to call what we do "coding"
Because he clearly ISN'T A "CODER" (or whatever you want to call it). IMO it's perfectly reasonable for someone to object to another person with no clue inappropriately using terminology in their field while at the same time objecting to others with little to no clue trying to pigeonhole their "title" with arbitrary tests/certifications.
Why do you feel that you need a "state" to approve your knowledge to call yourself whatever you want? That much sums up why some countries innovate, and others don't. Call yourself whatever you want and just get things done, don't worry about bullshit "approved" titles.
Good point - and if you really think about it, that's the way it SHOULD be. If we prevented the case you describe, all emulators like WINE, MAME, etc would not be possible. It goes all the way back to DR DOS, etc. I think it's pretty clear that the open source community has gained SO MUCH MORE from being able to reverse engineer interfaces than any sort of "workaround" of GPL-like library licenses. Linux itself was based on UNIX/POSIX. If clean-room implementation of interfaces weren't fair game it would never have existed!
No, that doesn't make sense, and it doesn't change anything. It's not about libraries, it's about interfaces. You could create you own library using the same function names/signatures, but you can't use someone else's code beyond that.
The first problem is no serious SW engineer calls it "coding". In this area Tim Cook sounds as clueless as any other executive who has never actually done the work he manages.
Did you read more than the title of the article? He wasn't asking for programming how-to suggestions, he was asking for NON technical book suggestions that provide a different perspective on programming that he could read when he needs a break.
Still, my suggestion would be - when you need a *break*, make it a real BREAK. You are better off reading something totally unrelated to your work/study that stimulates your imagination than something directly related.
Personally in the (still somewhat limiting) area of technical non-fiction, I got a more interesting perspective on science history and human nature out of books like Genome, Chaos, or Gun, Germs & Steel than something like The Mythical Man Month (which when read by experienced software engineers pretty much just points out what they have already experienced, or by novices what they will inevitably experience - those sorts of books need to be read by *managers*/executives who make the stupid decisions or they really don't do much good...)
Those are the words they are using to determine the percentage of female Twitter bullies?
This doesn't prove women bully other women as much as men do, it just proves women are a lot less creative in their bullying (clearly no one involved in the study is actually a woman receiving any typical form of Twitter misogyny). But I guess that's the kind of idiotic non-science you get from a "think tank"...
Sorry, but everything you said is either half true, untrue, or just plain ignorant, starting with your global warming strawman and ending with your last sentence, in which you try to summarize the entire debate into a trite judgement on anyone who doesn't agree with you - including many MANY businesspeople, politicians, and economists who obviously know a lot more about the topic than you do.
Eliminate corporate income taxes, or even reduce them substantially, and you'll see that money quickly come into the US and be put to work here, either in investments or in expansion of operations. Having large cash reserves is generally not a good business strategy in most cases; it's generally more efficient to use the funds to grow the business and to rely on debt to weather short-term surprises, as long as the company is healthy.
So, let them exploit loopholes the rest of us can't until we give up. Great solution. Another one would be to get some BALLS and fix the problem with actual tariffs and sanctions. You think Apple, Google, or Microsoft is going to move their HQs offshore? Not likely. And if they do, there are so many things that can be done to penalize them. Invalidate their patents, tax the shit out of any overseas outgoing transfers, etc.
Eliminating corporate taxes is about the same "solution" as eliminating taxes for millionaires just because they have enough money to hire accounts that can figure out how to avoid most of their taxes. The REAL problem is that Congress is basically bought and sold by corporate America so no one has the will to do anything. Apple gets HUGE advantages from being based in the US, but doesn't want to pay SHIT for that privilege.
The main reason is that corporations don't actually pay taxes, people do.
Bullshit. Taxes are on PROFIT. If you think most companies are capable of managing their profit to the level of being able to reliably set prices based on taxation, you have not been paying the LEAST bit of attention to those somewhat significant industries like, say, automotive, airline, banking, petroleum, or anything else with the least bit of market volatility. And other industries like retail? Costco and Walmart paid almost 30% in taxes last year, and I don't see their customers or shareholders complaining about skyrocketing prices. Your argument is totally bogus and not based on reality...
First bringing up money then going "oh and but the software is free" doesn't fly.
Free as in open source, not money, dumbass. Obviously. Open source software still costs in terms of money/resources/opportunity cost.
Also, even if developer time is worth that much, it's just one developer. How many of those old devices are you proposing to replace? Take the total cost for all those replacements and suddenly you can employ several developers full time for years.
Show me the companies worth paying developers to maintain enough 20 year old systems to pay for several developers full time... I bet you can't. The efficiency gain of power usage to performance alone would have justified replacing them over a decade ago.
Also because, often the devices you are proposing to replace are tied to specific hardware requirements that can be as simple as "hardware serial port"*,
Did you even RTFA? They are dropping Pentrium support. P4-class are still seriously old and you can get hardware serial ports. Not to mention you can still get "hardware serial ports" on PCI cards if you really want...
Why does it have to affect them? Are you installing the latest Debian on them? And if so, WHY? Older versions are perfectly usable (and possibly preferable) for a basic router.
Maintaining useless old CPU architectures costs time and money. Given you can buy a Pentium 4 class CPU for $3 (or a quad core 2.8GHz i7 for $50), and a good developer's time is easily worth $100 per hour, it just plain doesn't make sense to support 20+ year old Intel chips.
If you believe differently, well - GCC is an open source project. How much are you paying to use it? Support it yourself, or spend $100 and get a new i686 capable computer.
Except this whole article is about SAME DAY delivery, which no, UPS and FedEX can't do for Amazon - that's the WHOLE POINT.
They can already get 1-2 day delivery from UPS/FedEx/etc, but same day is done via Amazon couriers, and basically, they are hesitant to deliver to certain neighborhoods. It's basically like an Uber Black driver picking up in South Central LA. Will someone do it? Maybe, but they are going to charge $$$.
He's a businessman and a moderate libertarian first, and an innovator and environmentalist second.
The thing that pissed me off the most about him is as soon as he finished paying off the $500M the government lent him for Tesla, he proclaimed that he was against government subsidies. When you think about it, his entire BUSINESS MODEL has been investing in companies that get the most subsidies (solar power, space exploration, electric cars) - to the tune of an estimated $5B combined. I really want to admire him, but that level of hypocrisy is hard to stomach...
"Inherent subsidy" is kind of a funny complaint from an off-and-on (off when his companies get subsidies, on when his competitors do) libertarian like Elon Musk...
I'd say "he got less votes" if I was speaking informally, but in a formal context, I'd say "he received fewer votes".
Context, absolutely. And I assume that based on your UID you are not new here, and already know you are on one of the most pedantic sites on the Internet. So, *how* is it you don't get the context?
Some do, because they gave up and paid for a key to sign their bootloaders. So I suppose you could say it works - but so does disabling the features in the BIOS that prevents you from creating/modifying your own bootloader.
All of this is pretty irrelevant to the main point, though. ImageMagick is an awesome tool but it's just not remotely the same things as Photoshop/Adobe CS.
Personally, I have no interest in the Apple Watch. I really just don't like wearing watches in general, let alone digital "smart watches".
My wife was looking for a fitness device, and bought, tried, and returned two that were horrible. I got her an Apple Watch and after 6 months she still loves it. The kicker - she HATES most technology, and is about the opposite of a "gadget person" as one can be.
Not surprisingly, the Gizmodo "reviewer" barely mentions anything about the fitness tracking, etc, capabilities (effectively nothing, really). Sure, there are other devices that do fitness cheaper, but if a tech novice (which, really, is the majority of ACTUAL consumers) thinks the Apple Watch did it better than the others, maybe Apple really doesn't (and shouldn't) give a shit what a Gizmodo technerd thinks.
But why take my word for it - estimates are that the AW sold about 12M units in 2015, which adds up to about $6B and 60%+ of the smart watch market. Swatch did a bit over $8B revenue last year, and Rolex $4.5B. But yet the AW is a failure??
Could they come up with a *less* scientific desciption than "pleasant"? It's not only scientifically vague, it's pretty much inherently subjective as the definition is "giving a sense of happy satisfaction or enjoyment."
Personally I prefer the house at about 67 degrees in the evening, while my wife wants to turn up the thermostat past 70. Though ironically she is always mentioning in the winter how she misses the snowy winter weather in the Midwest vs the warm, rainy winters in California.
Of course I would also imagine based on their precise metrics we have had 3-4 extremely "pleasant" winters here in CA lately, weather-wise! As long as you don't take into account the severe drought, water rationing, dead plants, or near-empty reservoirs and creeks.
Slashdot Mirror
While the number of years "in the industry" is mostly irrelevant, I'm only a few years shy of 30 - and I'd bet I have 1000x more customers using my "code" than you do. If you want to debate the further post as a non-AC or STFU (that's SHUT THE FUCK UP in case you aren't up on the recent lingo).
In my experience people who actually understand how computers work call it "coding". PHBs and the IRS call it "Programmer"..
Then your "experience" is clearly very minimal.
Welcome to the civilized world. It's entirely appropriate for the state to make sure the people who design our buildings and bridges, or who cut us open with surgical instruments, or who fly us from city to city in jumbo jets are actually qualified to do so.
Are you doing any of those things? No? Then your "examples" are irrelevant.
And yet, you were the one complaining that Tim Cook had the audacity to call what we do "coding"
Because he clearly ISN'T A "CODER" (or whatever you want to call it). IMO it's perfectly reasonable for someone to object to another person with no clue inappropriately using terminology in their field while at the same time objecting to others with little to no clue trying to pigeonhole their "title" with arbitrary tests/certifications.
Why do you feel that you need a "state" to approve your knowledge to call yourself whatever you want? That much sums up why some countries innovate, and others don't. Call yourself whatever you want and just get things done, don't worry about bullshit "approved" titles.
Good point - and if you really think about it, that's the way it SHOULD be. If we prevented the case you describe, all emulators like WINE, MAME, etc would not be possible. It goes all the way back to DR DOS, etc. I think it's pretty clear that the open source community has gained SO MUCH MORE from being able to reverse engineer interfaces than any sort of "workaround" of GPL-like library licenses. Linux itself was based on UNIX/POSIX. If clean-room implementation of interfaces weren't fair game it would never have existed!
No, that doesn't make sense, and it doesn't change anything. It's not about libraries, it's about interfaces. You could create you own library using the same function names/signatures, but you can't use someone else's code beyond that.
The first problem is no serious SW engineer calls it "coding". In this area Tim Cook sounds as clueless as any other executive who has never actually done the work he manages.
Did you read more than the title of the article? He wasn't asking for programming how-to suggestions, he was asking for NON technical book suggestions that provide a different perspective on programming that he could read when he needs a break.
Still, my suggestion would be - when you need a *break*, make it a real BREAK. You are better off reading something totally unrelated to your work/study that stimulates your imagination than something directly related.
Personally in the (still somewhat limiting) area of technical non-fiction, I got a more interesting perspective on science history and human nature out of books like Genome, Chaos, or Gun, Germs & Steel than something like The Mythical Man Month (which when read by experienced software engineers pretty much just points out what they have already experienced, or by novices what they will inevitably experience - those sorts of books need to be read by *managers*/executives who make the stupid decisions or they really don't do much good...)
Those are the words they are using to determine the percentage of female Twitter bullies?
This doesn't prove women bully other women as much as men do, it just proves women are a lot less creative in their bullying (clearly no one involved in the study is actually a woman receiving any typical form of Twitter misogyny). But I guess that's the kind of idiotic non-science you get from a "think tank"...
Sorry, but everything you said is either half true, untrue, or just plain ignorant, starting with your global warming strawman and ending with your last sentence, in which you try to summarize the entire debate into a trite judgement on anyone who doesn't agree with you - including many MANY businesspeople, politicians, and economists who obviously know a lot more about the topic than you do.
Eliminate corporate income taxes, or even reduce them substantially, and you'll see that money quickly come into the US and be put to work here, either in investments or in expansion of operations. Having large cash reserves is generally not a good business strategy in most cases; it's generally more efficient to use the funds to grow the business and to rely on debt to weather short-term surprises, as long as the company is healthy.
So, let them exploit loopholes the rest of us can't until we give up. Great solution. Another one would be to get some BALLS and fix the problem with actual tariffs and sanctions. You think Apple, Google, or Microsoft is going to move their HQs offshore? Not likely. And if they do, there are so many things that can be done to penalize them. Invalidate their patents, tax the shit out of any overseas outgoing transfers, etc.
Eliminating corporate taxes is about the same "solution" as eliminating taxes for millionaires just because they have enough money to hire accounts that can figure out how to avoid most of their taxes. The REAL problem is that Congress is basically bought and sold by corporate America so no one has the will to do anything. Apple gets HUGE advantages from being based in the US, but doesn't want to pay SHIT for that privilege.
The main reason is that corporations don't actually pay taxes, people do.
Bullshit. Taxes are on PROFIT. If you think most companies are capable of managing their profit to the level of being able to reliably set prices based on taxation, you have not been paying the LEAST bit of attention to those somewhat significant industries like, say, automotive, airline, banking, petroleum, or anything else with the least bit of market volatility. And other industries like retail? Costco and Walmart paid almost 30% in taxes last year, and I don't see their customers or shareholders complaining about skyrocketing prices. Your argument is totally bogus and not based on reality...
First bringing up money then going "oh and but the software is free" doesn't fly.
Free as in open source, not money, dumbass. Obviously. Open source software still costs in terms of money/resources/opportunity cost.
Also, even if developer time is worth that much, it's just one developer. How many of those old devices are you proposing to replace? Take the total cost for all those replacements and suddenly you can employ several developers full time for years.
Show me the companies worth paying developers to maintain enough 20 year old systems to pay for several developers full time... I bet you can't. The efficiency gain of power usage to performance alone would have justified replacing them over a decade ago.
Also because, often the devices you are proposing to replace are tied to specific hardware requirements that can be as simple as "hardware serial port"*,
Did you even RTFA? They are dropping Pentrium support. P4-class are still seriously old and you can get hardware serial ports. Not to mention you can still get "hardware serial ports" on PCI cards if you really want...
Why does it have to affect them? Are you installing the latest Debian on them? And if so, WHY? Older versions are perfectly usable (and possibly preferable) for a basic router.
Maintaining useless old CPU architectures costs time and money. Given you can buy a Pentium 4 class CPU for $3 (or a quad core 2.8GHz i7 for $50), and a good developer's time is easily worth $100 per hour, it just plain doesn't make sense to support 20+ year old Intel chips.
If you believe differently, well - GCC is an open source project. How much are you paying to use it? Support it yourself, or spend $100 and get a new i686 capable computer.
Except this whole article is about SAME DAY delivery, which no, UPS and FedEX can't do for Amazon - that's the WHOLE POINT.
They can already get 1-2 day delivery from UPS/FedEx/etc, but same day is done via Amazon couriers, and basically, they are hesitant to deliver to certain neighborhoods. It's basically like an Uber Black driver picking up in South Central LA. Will someone do it? Maybe, but they are going to charge $$$.
He's a businessman and a moderate libertarian first, and an innovator and environmentalist second.
The thing that pissed me off the most about him is as soon as he finished paying off the $500M the government lent him for Tesla, he proclaimed that he was against government subsidies. When you think about it, his entire BUSINESS MODEL has been investing in companies that get the most subsidies (solar power, space exploration, electric cars) - to the tune of an estimated $5B combined. I really want to admire him, but that level of hypocrisy is hard to stomach...
"Inherent subsidy" is kind of a funny complaint from an off-and-on (off when his companies get subsidies, on when his competitors do) libertarian like Elon Musk...
I'd say "he got less votes" if I was speaking informally, but in a formal context, I'd say "he received fewer votes".
Context, absolutely. And I assume that based on your UID you are not new here, and already know you are on one of the most pedantic sites on the Internet. So, *how* is it you don't get the context?
Some do, because they gave up and paid for a key to sign their bootloaders. So I suppose you could say it works - but so does disabling the features in the BIOS that prevents you from creating/modifying your own bootloader.
All of this is pretty irrelevant to the main point, though. ImageMagick is an awesome tool but it's just not remotely the same things as Photoshop/Adobe CS.
Personally, I have no interest in the Apple Watch. I really just don't like wearing watches in general, let alone digital "smart watches".
My wife was looking for a fitness device, and bought, tried, and returned two that were horrible. I got her an Apple Watch and after 6 months she still loves it. The kicker - she HATES most technology, and is about the opposite of a "gadget person" as one can be.
Not surprisingly, the Gizmodo "reviewer" barely mentions anything about the fitness tracking, etc, capabilities (effectively nothing, really). Sure, there are other devices that do fitness cheaper, but if a tech novice (which, really, is the majority of ACTUAL consumers) thinks the Apple Watch did it better than the others, maybe Apple really doesn't (and shouldn't) give a shit what a Gizmodo technerd thinks.
But why take my word for it - estimates are that the AW sold about 12M units in 2015, which adds up to about $6B and 60%+ of the smart watch market. Swatch did a bit over $8B revenue last year, and Rolex $4.5B. But yet the AW is a failure??
The memo said the majority of these demands sought data on foreigners, but almost one-in-five were requests for data on Americans.
But, what? 80% does seem to meet and exceed the definition of "majority." Is that good? Obviously not. Does it meet their weasaly legalese? Yup.
And so has Tahoe in CA. But that's because the last few years of "best in years" were so bad it almost bankrupted the Tahoe ski resorts.
Could they come up with a *less* scientific desciption than "pleasant"? It's not only scientifically vague, it's pretty much inherently subjective as the definition is "giving a sense of happy satisfaction or enjoyment."
Personally I prefer the house at about 67 degrees in the evening, while my wife wants to turn up the thermostat past 70. Though ironically she is always mentioning in the winter how she misses the snowy winter weather in the Midwest vs the warm, rainy winters in California.
Of course I would also imagine based on their precise metrics we have had 3-4 extremely "pleasant" winters here in CA lately, weather-wise! As long as you don't take into account the severe drought, water rationing, dead plants, or near-empty reservoirs and creeks.
Sounds like a rap battle between NgDT and MC Hawking is about to go down!