Big thanks to everyone for all the quality advice!
To explain my motives, I'm tired of incessantly admining/configuring/fighting the system at home. I have the money to pay Apple to do that for me now. I still advocate Linux on the desktop at work, but I don't get paid to tinker at home.
Are you doing something brutal computationally? Or are you developing generic large programs? Generally, unless you really need an enormous amount of CPU power, or a huge amount of disk storage, an iMac or G4 PowerBook will be nearly as fast.
Actually, between the girl and I, we'll be doing all sorts of development (one of us always seems to be working from home). She'll be spanking the memory writing Java Swing code in JBuilder, and I'll be spanking the CPU's with computationally intense C++ financial modelling algorithms. I also plan on picking up Objective C along with making some GUI toys for XML authoring I've been tinkering with on Linux using QT.
Especially for her, screen real-estate is tantamount in importance (our current workstation uses dual 19" monitors). Therefore, I think I'll have to stick to a tower to power our current screen real-estate (and eventually a Studio Display) even though I would MUCH rather have the iMac -- I'm a staunch minimalist at heart.
You have good knowledge of UNIX and a girlfriend. Not many people can say that.
That may be true, but I'm not necessarily good at one of them. Ok, either of them....
I've already gotten my bike stolen this summer when it was locked up the only place I could find outside.
That sucks, I know the feeling. My advice is to go even cheaper next time. Get a ratty looking old dependable bike like a schwinn or raleigh from your local thrift scene. Or if you're anywhere near Chicago, Central America or the Caribbean hook up with the Working Bikes co-op. There's a list of similar organizations all over the US here.
Why do I have to be so poor and cars so expensive!
Hmm, I think it has something to do with the American Dream, or some other conspiracy.;)
As both a (former) meteorologist and a (practicing) bicyclist, I admit your points have merit. However, seeing that a very good, new bicycle can be purchased and maintained for less money than the average set of auto tires, why not give it a try? There are many nice weather days (even in Michigan), you don't always need to wear a suit, carry a presentation or laptop.
As for the 30 minute commute, maybe the most ecologically friendly thing you could do is live closer to where you work (or vice-versa)? Or best of all: telecommute!
You're not kidding. Even though it is considerably popular here in Chicago (we have a very pro-bicycle mayor and many active riders), I still consider urban bicycling here to be an extreme sport.
"The Atlanta Bicycle Campaign is a member-supported organization working for better on-road bicycling conditions in metro-Atlanta. We believe that truly healthy communities welcome bicyclists and provide a safe riding environment. We promote bicycle transportation, responsible recreational riding, and education for bicyclists and motorists alike."
First, the Corbin Sparrow really seems to taking hold in places like Los Angeles and to a lessor degree Atlanta.
However, the lowest emissions vehicle around is a bicycle. I mean this in all seriousness. The Bay area has a uniquely nice bicycling climate, and since you already have one car, you don't have to give up the occasional hauling-of-big-stuff cars are good at. And don't underestimate the health benefits of such daily exercise. I love it since you don't have to take extra time out of your day just to go to the gym.
In order to complete this, a set of regression tests were written. For example, if the amount of money collected doesn't match up to our order table, we get notified via our cellphone's text messaging as soon as the cronjob picks it up.
My question is, how common is this for the software industry? My company had never heard of this before I came along. Is it the norm? (When you answer, also say whether or not your company does risk management.)
This depends. Every company I've worked for has claimed to be concerned with mitigating risks both in the testing phases and post-release phases of the software development lifecycle. However, the amount and kind of testing and programming actually done have varied wildly and always ends up being determined by the industry for which the software is being built. In your case, money is the biggest factor. Organizations such as banks and other financial institutions are highly risk-averse due to the responsibilities and legal concerns related to handling others' money. It follows that these organizations regularly conduct formal testing of their code as well as "program paranoid" to mitigate screw-ups. In start-up's I've worked at in the past, this wasn't nearly the case since it was more important to get a product out the door and this sort of testing/coding always went out the window with looming deadlines.
So to answer your question, yes, regression testing (and paranoid programming) are highly common in the IT industry and their respective importance is a function of the risk aversion of the intended users/customers. My advice is to always practice good, paranoid, professional programming augmented by formal testing procedures. Vary the time spent on each to achieve the appropriate balance.
Frankly, the best way to enlighten yourself on this matter is to educate yourself in the ways of Extreme Programming. The horribly trendy name aside, this is the truly the only management fad I've seen in 10+ years that holds any merit.
It may not do exactly what you describe, but DivX (for Mac) is an important technology to have in your back pocket on any project of this type. Check it out.
(assuming you want to run Windows or some other commercial OS and don't wish to steal it)
That's quite an assumption. What happened to slashdot's Linux and *BSD majority? Did everyone here give up and go to Windows or OSX?
In case the poster doesn't know, you can save tons of money on your next PC by skipping the Windows tax and using a free, open-source operating system. email me and I'll mail you a CD of your choice of Debian Linux, FreeBSD or OpenBSD to install on your shiny new PC.
Yeah, the media sure did steer clear of scandals during the Clinton years. Yup, not once did I hear mention of scandal on the radio or TV with a Dem in the whitehouse.
Get your head outta Rush Limbaugh's ass and realize how stupid comments like these are.
Re:Thanks for the vote of confidence, but...
on
Carbon Sequestration
·
· Score: 2
Wow, this is a challenge.
For starters, I would stay away from all commerically funded media. I prefer sources from within the scientific community and from non-profits with clearly stated goals of objectivity. Specifically, I've been impressed with the work of theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Their document "Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions" is available for download here. This is an excellent introduction to the current state of the climate change debate.
If only everyone were as motivated to seek out the truth for themselves as you are. sigh.
I'm sure it wasn't intentional, but by limiting the client to windows platforms only, isn't this creating a homogenous, one-world-view pseudo-civilization? I, for one, would prefer a "melding-pot universe simulation" to this limited one.
I recently upgraded my audio-free car (built in 1962, gimme a break) with an iPod. I installed speakers and an amplifier. All amps take RCA plugs for audio input, so all I needed to connect the iPod was a $3 radio shack mini plug to RCA adapter.
because stopping the cause now won't reverse any of the damage already done
Incorrect. If we were to do the unlikely, and greatly reduce/stop releasing carbon into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels; over time, the manmade global warming effects would dissipate. The earth's natural carbon cycle between the air, ocean and land would (over a looooong time) alleviate the unnatural quantity of carbon in the air.
Oil baro^H^H^H
Democratically electe^H^H^H
Dubya advocates dumping tons of toxins into the oceans over more responsible action (Kyoto protocol) to "reduce greenhouse gas emissions"? Isn't that like building a bigger toilet to cure an over-eating problem? Or declaring a war on drug...oh, never mind.
at least have a clue at how freakin' complicated this sort of thing can be.
And then you say:
I don't cite a source because it's, well, just simple thermodynamics.
You negate yourself: how can something you admit to be highly complicated be summarized by something you admit to be simple?
As someone who, at one time, actually studied and researched atmospheric thermodynamics, I can tell you, with certaintly, the simple laws of thermodynamics alone are inadequate to explain the dynamics of the earth's climate. The basic laws of thermodynamics assume ideal conditions, including a vacuum. Atmospheric thermodynamics takes into account chemistry, fluid dynamics, cloud/water physics, radiative transfer, and much more. Climate research combines this singular discipline along with many others, including: oceanography, geology, atmospheric physics, wave dynamics, and much more.
I appreciate your perpsective, but don't dimiss all of the valid, scientifically sound knowledge we have of the atmosphere and climate. To do that is to dismiss the same scientific process you learned along with the basic laws of thermodynamics. Give your fellow scientists in climate research some credit.
Basically, heat is aggressively non-linear. Just because you add a thousand gigajoules of heat to the planet does not mean the planet is a thousand gagijoules hotter. That's only true for an instantaneously fast heat addition (asteroid strike?) and then still only true instantaneously after the heat addition. Immediately, the planet begins radiating away any energy it has that brings its temperature above the local background temperature. Within hours, the heat of the planet with the addition of the heat and without the addition of the heat may vary by only a single-digit percentage of your added heat; within days, the effect is negligible.
This is a very interesting comment. I'm curious to learn more of this theory. Can you cite a source? In particular, I'm curious to see how much of this theory is based on fundamental thermodynamics, and how much of it is based on global chemistry.
And yes, this is very complicated subject. That's why I'm glad to see experts from the many fields studying climate change working together.
Slashdot Mirror
To explain my motives, I'm tired of incessantly admining/configuring/fighting the system at home. I have the money to pay Apple to do that for me now. I still advocate Linux on the desktop at work, but I don't get paid to tinker at home.
Actually, between the girl and I, we'll be doing all sorts of development (one of us always seems to be working from home). She'll be spanking the memory writing Java Swing code in JBuilder, and I'll be spanking the CPU's with computationally intense C++ financial modelling algorithms. I also plan on picking up Objective C along with making some GUI toys for XML authoring I've been tinkering with on Linux using QT.
Especially for her, screen real-estate is tantamount in importance (our current workstation uses dual 19" monitors). Therefore, I think I'll have to stick to a tower to power our current screen real-estate (and eventually a Studio Display) even though I would MUCH rather have the iMac -- I'm a staunch minimalist at heart.
That may be true, but I'm not necessarily good at one of them. Ok, either of them....
Here in Chicago, we've made an art out of it. In particular, o local Bike Winter advocate has written a veritable howto article.
That sucks, I know the feeling. My advice is to go even cheaper next time. Get a ratty looking old dependable bike like a schwinn or raleigh from your local thrift scene. Or if you're anywhere near Chicago, Central America or the Caribbean hook up with the Working Bikes co-op. There's a list of similar organizations all over the US here.
Hmm, I think it has something to do with the American Dream, or some other conspiracy. ;)
As for the 30 minute commute, maybe the most ecologically friendly thing you could do is live closer to where you work (or vice-versa)? Or best of all: telecommute!
You're not kidding. Even though it is considerably popular here in Chicago (we have a very pro-bicycle mayor and many active riders), I still consider urban bicycling here to be an extreme sport.
Also, consider lending your support to the Atlanta Bicycle Campaign. From their homepage:
Of course the electric bicycle that should be the most appealing to the slashdot crowd should be the Sparc.
First, the Corbin Sparrow really seems to taking hold in places like Los Angeles and to a lessor degree Atlanta.
However, the lowest emissions vehicle around is a bicycle. I mean this in all seriousness. The Bay area has a uniquely nice bicycling climate, and since you already have one car, you don't have to give up the occasional hauling-of-big-stuff cars are good at. And don't underestimate the health benefits of such daily exercise. I love it since you don't have to take extra time out of your day just to go to the gym.
In the Bay Area, there's even a service to shuttle bicycles over the Bay bridge for $1.
What you describe isn't regression testing. Regression testing "is a quality control measure to ensure that the newly-modified code still complies with its specified requirements and that unmodified code has not been affected by the maintenance activity." More accurately what you've done is paranoid programming. Really, these two things are orthogonal.
This depends. Every company I've worked for has claimed to be concerned with mitigating risks both in the testing phases and post-release phases of the software development lifecycle. However, the amount and kind of testing and programming actually done have varied wildly and always ends up being determined by the industry for which the software is being built. In your case, money is the biggest factor. Organizations such as banks and other financial institutions are highly risk-averse due to the responsibilities and legal concerns related to handling others' money. It follows that these organizations regularly conduct formal testing of their code as well as "program paranoid" to mitigate screw-ups. In start-up's I've worked at in the past, this wasn't nearly the case since it was more important to get a product out the door and this sort of testing/coding always went out the window with looming deadlines.
So to answer your question, yes, regression testing (and paranoid programming) are highly common in the IT industry and their respective importance is a function of the risk aversion of the intended users/customers. My advice is to always practice good, paranoid, professional programming augmented by formal testing procedures. Vary the time spent on each to achieve the appropriate balance.
Frankly, the best way to enlighten yourself on this matter is to educate yourself in the ways of Extreme Programming. The horribly trendy name aside, this is the truly the only management fad I've seen in 10+ years that holds any merit.
It may not do exactly what you describe, but DivX (for Mac) is an important technology to have in your back pocket on any project of this type. Check it out.
We'd better keep this a secret, or else all those senators and lobbyists that killed the bill to raise CAFE standards would look pretty stupid right now!
That's quite an assumption. What happened to slashdot's Linux and *BSD majority? Did everyone here give up and go to Windows or OSX?
In case the poster doesn't know, you can save tons of money on your next PC by skipping the Windows tax and using a free, open-source operating system. email me and I'll mail you a CD of your choice of Debian Linux, FreeBSD or OpenBSD to install on your shiny new PC.
Exactly -- and what trip through the US would be complete without cheese, an overdose of commerciality and an overwhelming sense of "average."
Wall Drug!
The full op-ed piece can be found here
AltaVista:
Republican Scandal 49,798 hits
Democratic Scandal 258,173 hits
Google:
Republican Scandal 108,000 hits
Democratic Scandal 162,000 hits
Well put. You're some anonymous coward!
Yeah, the media sure did steer clear of scandals during the Clinton years. Yup, not once did I hear mention of scandal on the radio or TV with a Dem in the whitehouse.
Get your head outta Rush Limbaugh's ass and realize how stupid comments like these are.
Wow, this is a challenge.
For starters, I would stay away from all commerically funded media. I prefer sources from within the scientific community and from non-profits with clearly stated goals of objectivity. Specifically, I've been impressed with the work of theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Their document "Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions" is available for download here. This is an excellent introduction to the current state of the climate change debate.
If only everyone were as motivated to seek out the truth for themselves as you are. sigh.
Amen! Bravo!
People with your combination of knowledge and common sense are woefully under represented in the ongoing climate change debate.
I'm sure it wasn't intentional, but by limiting the client to windows platforms only, isn't this creating a homogenous, one-world-view pseudo-civilization?
I, for one, would prefer a "melding-pot universe simulation" to this limited one.
I recently upgraded my audio-free car (built in 1962, gimme a break) with an iPod. I installed speakers and an amplifier. All amps take RCA plugs for audio input, so all I needed to connect the iPod was a $3 radio shack mini plug to RCA adapter.
Incorrect. If we were to do the unlikely, and greatly reduce/stop releasing carbon into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels; over time, the manmade global warming effects would dissipate. The earth's natural carbon cycle between the air, ocean and land would (over a looooong time) alleviate the unnatural quantity of carbon in the air.
Oil baro^H^H^H Democratically electe^H^H^H Dubya advocates dumping tons of toxins into the oceans over more responsible action (Kyoto protocol) to "reduce greenhouse gas emissions"? Isn't that like building a bigger toilet to cure an over-eating problem? Or declaring a war on drug...oh, never mind.
First you say:
And then you say:
You negate yourself: how can something you admit to be highly complicated be summarized by something you admit to be simple?
As someone who, at one time, actually studied and researched atmospheric thermodynamics, I can tell you, with certaintly, the simple laws of thermodynamics alone are inadequate to explain the dynamics of the earth's climate. The basic laws of thermodynamics assume ideal conditions, including a vacuum. Atmospheric thermodynamics takes into account chemistry, fluid dynamics, cloud/water physics, radiative transfer, and much more. Climate research combines this singular discipline along with many others, including: oceanography, geology, atmospheric physics, wave dynamics, and much more.
I appreciate your perpsective, but don't dimiss all of the valid, scientifically sound knowledge we have of the atmosphere and climate. To do that is to dismiss the same scientific process you learned along with the basic laws of thermodynamics. Give your fellow scientists in climate research some credit.
This is a very interesting comment. I'm curious to learn more of this theory. Can you cite a source? In particular, I'm curious to see how much of this theory is based on fundamental thermodynamics, and how much of it is based on global chemistry.
And yes, this is very complicated subject. That's why I'm glad to see experts from the many fields studying climate change working together.