You hit it. (Also I didn't see any previous post saying this). Irony... Facebook, Yahoo (and eBay)... all have software quality that SUCKS. They all release broken code - many times. (FB: open a video to a 'new' style window; the video doesn't play, the "back" arrow takes you back to the top of the list, you've lost your place; Yahoo: I've all but abandon it due to bad quality. eBay: New features in "rating" have grammatical errors/issue; and BAD (wrong) information -- all of these I have (attempted) to report to the companies many times. None of the companies have a meaningful feedback mechanism. For all of them -- their quality SUCKS. They are big enough that; who else are you going to go to?
For me; it is - when I see the video bug, stop scrolling down. For Yahoo, I've almost abandon it. For eBay -- don't leave any feedback -- and I'm cutting back. The thing is that these are people {managers} have no clue about quality or testing. The suggestion of ''Let's have developers test their on code'' is insane. Time and time again, developers can't write bug free code; and are unable to properly test. Why should they? They will be paid to fix it on the next release! (Which they never do). I've reviewed developers written automation. One test case - did nothing (and reported that it was successful). A group of test cases (about 40%) passed with the server "down". None of the automated test cases (written by dev's) gave any rational as what they were doing, or the goals of the test case. Were they testing the GUI function, the server function, the ability to get the job done... ? (No documentation... I have NEVER seen a dev write a test case that made sense by reading it). Yes, they (frequently) write great code. But you need a tester behind it writing test cases; both manual and automated.
Unlabelled or labelled without mission-related identifying information: approximately 215 reels
The archivist’s final recommendation: Destroy the tapes. “There is no evidence that suggests this material is historically significant... I recommend disposal through the immediate destruction of all magnetic tapes.”
I wish we {I} could recover the data and see that is there. The 215 reels of unlabeled data could be of value; and I believe is worth the time to investigate.
Someone (OP?) should research the author -- Environmental Progress. They are (were) founded by Shellenberger; and he and Environmental Progress have/are advocating Nuclear power.
I believe that Y! is the only free email service provider that won't let you bulk-save your email messages. So, I've all but left Yahoo; however How do I get my (old) messages out?
(Before the 'let it go' people come, I need the messages for legal purposes).
I was able to get *some* of the messages to Gmail; however, I would like to get all of them.
You have the source. You can determine the language (or pay someone who can). You can pay someone to fix the bug.
REALITY... might want to check into it.
Which is why I'm advocating (in the future in your case) to not buy these types of systems in the first place. I realise[sic] in this case it's after the fact. Maybe next time.
So - you advocate in buying nothing. Well, it will save money, just won't accomplish anything.
So next time ask for it.
"NOT OFFERED"... NOT AVAILABLE... BUY WHAT WE HAVE OR *NOTHING*... NO OTHER OPTION.
If the drivers (software) are open source (eg: in the case of Linux, in the kernel and supported by the kernel dev team), then they will be supportable (essentially) forever.
Ah... no. For one system --- there is an "open source" software option; and in this open-source I found an annoying bug. The dirty secret with open source, if the bug it isn't on someone "favorite" plate, it's not going to be looked at/fixed. And if I don't know the language that it is written in... then it won't be fixed.
Choose this type of software where possible.
... not possible; this is why I'm stuck in WinXP hell. The hardware that I'm stuck with is no longer available as 'new' and there are no "modern" drivers as an option. The software cannot migrate (and in one instance the owner of the software is no longer in business)
A decent compromise is an agreement that if the company stops supporting the software without an upgrade path (or goes out of business)
Again not an option. I need to put in a new development process to replace one piece of equipment (the 5-year issue); I need to replace hardware / driver (company is out of business & no one else makes it) and... the 3rd is BUGGY replacement software written in Python.
Granted it's not always offered, but that's my point - it's a choice.
and by doing it this once, Microsoft may have just screwed itself into supporting XP again
No, they didn't
What is MS to do?
1. Don't make upgrading that difficult. Make the upgrade / migration path easier, not more difficult.
2. TEST THEIR SOFTWARE. Hire in (back) QA and pay them for what they are worth. MS typically will undercut pay for SDET by about 25% (or more).
As I said earlier: I would like a viable migration path. Throwing in the garbage is not a viable migration path.
I have one system that I've been trying to upgrade for 5 years. Another system has a hardware device {and drivers} that are no longer available, which also has software form a company that is out of business. "Upgrade to Windows 10" won't work (and I'm not going to to the MS-Sell land of Win 10). I am grateful to MS for upgrading the ones that they did, and to the moron's in the "buy the latest now"; that is not an option, I've tried.
I believe that you are correct, "nobody is perfect", based on my experience - Microsoft goes out of there way not to be perfect or anywhere close to it. Several times now - MS has had a purge of testers (even when the company / division is profitable) . MS testing is almost always 'happy path automation'. When I was there (last) little attention was paid to documentation of what was the expected results or what the test case was to get done. Then the 'good news' that the replacement directorate level was under the belief that all developers should test their own code.
I also agree with "... and everyone else that finds security issues and keeps them private."
I have product "X". It works; most of the time. Mega Corporation has done everything they can to make it so I can't report problems, and all I can do is bitch about the problems on public forums and have people agree - the software has it's problems.
Now... without fixing any of the KNOWN issues, you want me to use and adapt Mega Corporation's next release "Y". I take a looks at it; and they have 'made it easier'...( they have not); they have added features that I will NEVER use; frequently remove features that I do use, and to make it worse they have not fixed the bugs that I've seen, and later I read about new bugs in Mega Corporation's products (not to mention security issues).
And when this is scaled down from Mega Corporation to Mini Corporation; they are doing everything they can to just get by. New major features... without fixes to old problems.
It would be amusing is Mega Corporation actually released a "next version" that was nothing but bug fixes.
This is why I stick with old software, and "Do Not" upgrade {improve} my "old" Software.
I'll stick with "alter": alter
ôltr/ verb
change or cause to change in character or composition, typically in a comparatively small but significant way.
"Eliot was persuaded to alter the passage" synonyms: change, make changes to, make different, make alterations to, adjust, make adjustments to, adapt, amend, modify, revise, revamp, rework, redo, refine, vary, transform
"Users were persuaded to alter their operating system/CPU"
Taking bets; M$ will release a 'patch' that has one intent: to deliberately break this 'fix'; so M$ can say "told you it wouldn't work". The bigger problem is: We won't know which "patch" M$ will 'break' to induce this problem.
BTW: It is no big effort for M$ to continue to test this as almost all testing by M$ is automated. There is an alter-motive behind this. Which I knew what it was.
I've tried. And been fired for it. From the unemployment office, it is amusing to watch as WS ATG investigates a company due to bad testing practices. It is disturbing to watch as 'computer glitches' cause hundreds if not thousands of travelers to be impacted. It is disturbing to send an email that - due to bad management practices (just what this article describes) mean that I cannot guarantee or relate the quality of a product; then be escorted out the door the next day.
I have and always will stand up for quality, which in this 'we will not fix it next release' era is a difficult thing to do.
Best thing to do: Put in 'requirements' that there be a code review before a 'check-in' is accepted. Best of luck if no one want to accept your recommendation(s).
The more 'automation' the put up front, the more people will eventually learn how to game the system. As you point out: ' discarding too many good applicants and letting too many awful ones through.'
I've also seen many systems that "don't work" for my employment, fields that are required that I don't know (or have or are not applicable).
Mark Zuckerberg is ether a fool or an idiot (or both). He seems to be out of touch with that is going on. I might suggest that his denial is so he won’t be forced (legally or morally) to enforce some kind of censorship (Slippery slope here what is satire vs what is false?)
One thing that I did find out: when you discover the “hate/false” posters (usually through other friends posts) and try post a correction about the inaccuracy: They will block you; and you will not be able to see the on-going problem. Also: The false information can be tracked to the same source(s).
This is so one sided, I'm surprise.. (well,maybe not) that it wasn't stopped earlier.
From the article:
"For one, when reservoirs are first flooded there’s organic matter in the soil and vegetation that can be converted by microbes into methane and carbon dioxide. Also, reservoirs because they are in line in rivers, they receive a lot of organic matter and organic sediment from upstream that can fuel the production of methane, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide."
Okay... these are not going to be an issue in a un-dammed river (or natural lake)?
Harrison says that reservoirs also tend to occur in areas where fertilizers are used on the surrounding land. Runoff from those fertilizers into bodies of water can cause algal blooms that can also produce more methane and carbon dioxide.
A level of being redundant... Okay... these are not going to be an issue in a un-dammed river? And... they are going to blame reservoirs for non-associated (man caused) pollution?
Someone is very anti-reservoirs (read pro coal/gas)
I noticed that the/. title - and description does not show the names of the companies. Both linked articles do not reveal the names until the second paragraph.
The Slashdot title should be more like "SCM Data and MMC Systems prosecuted for H-1B VISA Fraud".
I'm sure that everyone has an opinion on this.... so here is my recommendation: Get two more drives (I would say 6 TB each). Rotate between them at a rate that you fell comfortable 'loosing your changed data'. That might mean every night, every week or every month. This way your primary data will be available all the time in case of drive failure. You will ave two backup's at any point in time; one of which is "current".
In addition: I recommend that you download install and run "Hard Drive Sentinel"; I've been using it for years, and it is able to aid in the prediction of failure of multiple dives that I've had; resulting since I've used it with no data loss. This software can see into the drives of the RAID array; and to help you to know if you might expect a failure of one of the drives in your RAID array-- or if one of your back-up drives starts to experience problems.
Just as a virus must be out before AV can detect it, someone has to get the problem before it can be guarded. The new version of AV (or stopping a fake bank); a list of IP address (host) / scripts (route) that will block bad addresses/domains.
Spybot does this exact (well, all but "route") all the time.
didn't you read my follow up... use host in conjunction with route command:
route add 192.168.1.5 127.0.0.1
So, who is wearing the udder now?
So... if a list of IP address is/are known, it is possible to block them, even using your mule, er multi-point system - that is if they can't get the first point, they can't get an update. If they hard-code an IP address, route-block it. If they hard code a DNS, host block it.
Slashdot Mirror
You hit it. (Also I didn't see any previous post saying this). Irony ... Facebook, Yahoo (and eBay) ... all have software quality that SUCKS. They all release broken code - many times. (FB: open a video to a 'new' style window; the video doesn't play, the "back" arrow takes you back to the top of the list, you've lost your place; Yahoo: I've all but abandon it due to bad quality. eBay: New features in "rating" have grammatical errors/issue; and BAD (wrong) information -- all of these I have (attempted) to report to the companies many times. None of the companies have a meaningful feedback mechanism. For all of them -- their quality SUCKS. They are big enough that; who else are you going to go to? ... ? (No documentation... I have NEVER seen a dev write a test case that made sense by reading it). Yes, they (frequently) write great code. But you need a tester behind it writing test cases; both manual and automated.
/. article
"How Can I Make Testing Software More Stimulating"; the best response, worth reading and keeping:
You can't, so don't try
For me; it is - when I see the video bug, stop scrolling down. For Yahoo, I've almost abandon it. For eBay -- don't leave any feedback -- and I'm cutting back. The thing is that these are people {managers} have no clue about quality or testing. The suggestion of ''Let's have developers test their on code'' is insane. Time and time again, developers can't write bug free code; and are unable to properly test. Why should they? They will be paid to fix it on the next release! (Which they never do). I've reviewed developers written automation. One test case - did nothing (and reported that it was successful). A group of test cases (about 40%) passed with the server "down". None of the automated test cases (written by dev's) gave any rational as what they were doing, or the goals of the test case. Were they testing the GUI function, the server function, the ability to get the job done
From the
Unlabelled or labelled without mission-related identifying information: approximately 215 reels
The archivist’s final recommendation: Destroy the tapes. “There is no evidence that suggests this material is historically significant... I recommend disposal through the immediate destruction of all magnetic tapes.”
I wish we {I} could recover the data and see that is there. The 215 reels of unlabeled data could be of value; and I believe is worth the time to investigate.
....references of this that is will raise the question of impartiality of the article.
Per chance you might want to read my comment before reply.
Someone (OP?) should research the author -- Environmental Progress. They are (were) founded by Shellenberger; and he and Environmental Progress have/are advocating Nuclear power.
Environmental Progress President: We Need More Nuclear Power
There are so many references of this that is will raise the question of impartiality of the article.
I believe that Y! is the only free email service provider that won't let you bulk-save your email messages. So, I've all but left Yahoo; however How do I get my (old) messages out?
(Before the 'let it go' people come, I need the messages for legal purposes).
I was able to get *some* of the messages to Gmail; however, I would like to get all of them.
Suggestions?
You have the source. You can determine the language (or pay someone who can). You can pay someone to fix the bug.
REALITY ... might want to check into it.
Which is why I'm advocating (in the future in your case) to not buy these types of systems in the first place. I realise[sic] in this case it's after the fact. Maybe next time.
So - you advocate in buying nothing. Well, it will save money, just won't accomplish anything.
So next time ask for it.
"NOT OFFERED" ... NOT AVAILABLE... BUY WHAT WE HAVE OR *NOTHING* ... NO OTHER OPTION.
You misconstrued what I said.
Actually, you don't understand the problem.
If the drivers (software) are open source (eg: in the case of Linux, in the kernel and supported by the kernel dev team), then they will be supportable (essentially) forever.
Ah... no. For one system --- there is an "open source" software option; and in this open-source I found an annoying bug. The dirty secret with open source, if the bug it isn't on someone "favorite" plate, it's not going to be looked at/fixed. And if I don't know the language that it is written in ... then it won't be fixed.
Choose this type of software where possible.
... not possible; this is why I'm stuck in WinXP hell. The hardware that I'm stuck with is no longer available as 'new' and there are no "modern" drivers as an option. The software cannot migrate (and in one instance the owner of the software is no longer in business)
A decent compromise is an agreement that if the company stops supporting the software without an upgrade path (or goes out of business)
Again not an option. I need to put in a new development process to replace one piece of equipment (the 5-year issue); I need to replace hardware / driver (company is out of business & no one else makes it) and ... the 3rd is BUGGY replacement software written in Python.
Granted it's not always offered, but that's my point - it's a choice.
This 'choice' is never offered.
I sympathize, but in the end, it's YOUR fault
You have got to be kidding. Show me a list of software that can be upgraded before the upgrade is available.
and by doing it this once, Microsoft may have just screwed itself into supporting XP again
No, they didn't
What is MS to do?
1. Don't make upgrading that difficult. Make the upgrade / migration path easier, not more difficult.
2. TEST THEIR SOFTWARE. Hire in (back) QA and pay them for what they are worth. MS typically will undercut pay for SDET by about 25% (or more).
As I said earlier: I would like a viable migration path. Throwing in the garbage is not a viable migration path.
"YES" - for such critical needed updates.
I have one system that I've been trying to upgrade for 5 years. Another system has a hardware device {and drivers} that are no longer available, which also has software form a company that is out of business. "Upgrade to Windows 10" won't work (and I'm not going to to the MS-Sell land of Win 10). I am grateful to MS for upgrading the ones that they did, and to the moron's in the "buy the latest now"; that is not an option, I've tried.
I believe that you are correct, "nobody is perfect", based on my experience - Microsoft goes out of there way not to be perfect or anywhere close to it. Several times now - MS has had a purge of testers (even when the company / division is profitable) . MS testing is almost always 'happy path automation'. When I was there (last) little attention was paid to documentation of what was the expected results or what the test case was to get done. Then the 'good news' that the replacement directorate level was under the belief that all developers should test their own code.
I also agree with "... and everyone else that finds security issues and keeps them private."
Someone must have watched Brewster's Millions -- where this was treated as a crackpot idea.
I have product "X". It works; most of the time. Mega Corporation has done everything they can to make it so I can't report problems, and all I can do is bitch about the problems on public forums and have people agree - the software has it's problems.
... without fixing any of the KNOWN issues, you want me to use and adapt Mega Corporation's next release "Y". I take a looks at it; and they have 'made it easier' ...( they have not); they have added features that I will NEVER use; frequently remove features that I do use, and to make it worse they have not fixed the bugs that I've seen, and later I read about new bugs in Mega Corporation's products (not to mention security issues).
... without fixes to old problems.
Now
And when this is scaled down from Mega Corporation to Mini Corporation; they are doing everything they can to just get by. New major features
It would be amusing is Mega Corporation actually released a "next version" that was nothing but bug fixes.
This is why I stick with old software, and "Do Not" upgrade {improve} my "old" Software.
I'll stick with "alter":
alter
ôltr/
verb
change or cause to change in character or composition, typically in a comparatively small but significant way.
"Eliot was persuaded to alter the passage"
synonyms: change, make changes to, make different, make alterations to, adjust, make adjustments to, adapt, amend, modify, revise, revamp, rework, redo, refine, vary, transform
"Users were persuaded to alter their operating system/CPU"
Taking bets; M$ will release a 'patch' that has one intent: to deliberately break this 'fix'; so M$ can say "told you it wouldn't work". The bigger problem is: We won't know which "patch" M$ will 'break' to induce this problem.
BTW: It is no big effort for M$ to continue to test this as almost all testing by M$ is automated. There is an alter-motive behind this. Which I knew what it was.
I've tried. And been fired for it. From the unemployment office, it is amusing to watch as WS ATG investigates a company due to bad testing practices. It is disturbing to watch as 'computer glitches' cause hundreds if not thousands of travelers to be impacted. It is disturbing to send an email that - due to bad management practices (just what this article describes) mean that I cannot guarantee or relate the quality of a product; then be escorted out the door the next day.
I have and always will stand up for quality, which in this 'we will not fix it next release' era is a difficult thing to do.
Best thing to do: Put in 'requirements' that there be a code review before a 'check-in' is accepted. Best of luck if no one want to accept your recommendation(s).
The more 'automation' the put up front, the more people will eventually learn how to game the system. As you point out: ' discarding too many good applicants and letting too many awful ones through.'
I've also seen many systems that "don't work" for my employment, fields that are required that I don't know (or have or are not applicable).
Mark Zuckerberg is ether a fool or an idiot (or both). He seems to be out of touch with that is going on. I might suggest that his denial is so he won’t be forced (legally or morally) to enforce some kind of censorship (Slippery slope here what is satire vs what is false?)
One thing that I did find out: when you discover the “hate/false” posters (usually through other friends posts) and try post a correction about the inaccuracy: They will block you; and you will not be able to see the on-going problem. Also: The false information can be tracked to the same source(s).
It will take about one year, and cost only $20 million. Trust me.
From the article:
"For one, when reservoirs are first flooded there’s organic matter in the soil and vegetation that can be converted by microbes into methane and carbon dioxide. Also, reservoirs because they are in line in rivers, they receive a lot of organic matter and organic sediment from upstream that can fuel the production of methane, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide."
Okay... these are not going to be an issue in a un-dammed river (or natural lake)?
Harrison says that reservoirs also tend to occur in areas where fertilizers are used on the surrounding land. Runoff from those fertilizers into bodies of water can cause algal blooms that can also produce more methane and carbon dioxide.
A level of being redundant... Okay... these are not going to be an issue in a un-dammed river? And ... they are going to blame reservoirs for non-associated (man caused) pollution?
Someone is very anti-reservoirs (read pro coal/gas)
I noticed that the /. title - and description does not show the names of the companies. Both linked articles do not reveal the names until the second paragraph.
The Slashdot title should be more like "SCM Data and MMC Systems prosecuted for H-1B VISA Fraud".
I'm sure that everyone has an opinion on this.... so here is my recommendation: Get two more drives (I would say 6 TB each). Rotate between them at a rate that you fell comfortable 'loosing your changed data'. That might mean every night, every week or every month. This way your primary data will be available all the time in case of drive failure. You will ave two backup's at any point in time; one of which is "current".
In addition: I recommend that you download install and run "Hard Drive Sentinel"; I've been using it for years, and it is able to aid in the prediction of failure of multiple dives that I've had; resulting since I've used it with no data loss. This software can see into the drives of the RAID array; and to help you to know if you might expect a failure of one of the drives in your RAID array-- or if one of your back-up drives starts to experience problems.
"Yes"
Just as a virus must be out before AV can detect it, someone has to get the problem before it can be guarded. The new version of AV (or stopping a fake bank); a list of IP address (host) / scripts (route) that will block bad addresses/domains.
Spybot does this exact (well, all but "route") all the time.
simply connect to a hardcoded IP
didn't you read my follow up ... use host in conjunction with route command:
route add 192.168.1.5 127.0.0.1
So, who is wearing the udder now?
So... if a list of IP address is/are known, it is possible to block them, even using your mule, er multi-point system - that is if they can't get the first point, they can't get an update. If they hard-code an IP address, route-block it. If they hard code a DNS, host block it.
Sorry ... in conjunction with route command:
route add 192.168.1.5 127.0.0.1
The base concept of blocking DNS entries