False analogy, because considering the source is actually important to determining a solution in the case of AGW.
The question of whether humans are responsible is important, because it is used as an excuse to eliminate some very important remediation methods. Namely, stop burning fossil fuels.
1) None of the scientists ever said "only university-trained scientists can understand the data". 2) All of the science was done openly with all the cards on the table. Published papers are, well, published. 3) You could always discover the funding sources for the vast majority of all scientists, because most of them are required to disclose it. 4) Vanishingly little data was used that could be considered "tainted".
The only real difference between this research project and previous ones which came to the same conclusions was the personalities involved.
So, now you're claiming that you were born a climate denier? Otherwise, fortune has nothing to do with it.
Likely, people treated you exactly how you treated them. Maybe you should reflect on your past words by putting yourself in the shoes of the ones at whom they were directed. Might give you some important perspective and insight that will help you a little bit with that rather large chip on your shoulder.
The error in your statement is in using the word sceptics(sic). True skeptics can be convinced by evidence. Deniers, on the other hand, cannot ever be convinced, because they aren't opposing AGW based on evidence, but instead based on ideology.
Clue for you: It is still called "global warming" because, guess what? The globe is STILL warming. Get it?
Global warming is the mechanism. Climate change is the effect, INCLUDING record snowfalls (which are due to increased water vapor in the atmosphere from global warming) and cold snaps (which are due to altered polar oscillation/circulation patterns from global warming).
No one stopped calling it what it is, and the "climate change" terminolgy has been used just as long as the "global warming" terminology.
You chose a side based on faulty premises and encountered resistance. Poor baby. Grow up, man up, accept you were wrong, and get busy doing the right thing for a change.
Once you mature a little bit, you'll likely find a mountain of acceptance from other mature individuals.
Reporting on an event consisting of the release of preliminary results for a much-anticipated study that are clearly identified as preliminary results hardly needs to be agenda-driven. It's a news-worthy event. Just like the peer-review results of the study will be a news-worthy event.
Put your big, ugly bias back under your big, ugly hat. k?
Even before the vastly overhyped Network Computer, there has been this argument that "local storage is going away" to be replaced by some centrally-managed system over infinitely-fast network connections. The "cloud" metaphor is simply the latest incarnation of this unbelievably pollyanna-ish view of the future of computing platforms and all the applications built on them.
It is only people who have no clue about how "the rest of the platform" works who keep hyping this stupidity.
Something else I should point out is that you have a tremendous amount of practical experience that is immensely valuable. That gives you a big edge on younger programmers, simply because there are many important lessons that can only be learned through experience. As such, even with the decline of age, you will probably still be able to code circles around lesser experienced folks for some time to come because you know to do things they've yet to figure out (and that "figuring out" part often takes a LOT of time) and you also know a lot of the shortcuts to getting things done.
I don't know whether they've been jaded by the industry or their own failings, but here's my take:
I'm 46 now. I have pretty much run my own business for most of my career, so I've been able to pick and choose jobs based on my own personal desires and needs, rather than being forced to "take what I can get" from the "industry". I have pretty much "done it all", when it comes to various categories of IT, but I prefer programming the most, since I started out in it. I have a number of specialties that people depend on me for, and they are very happy with what I have done for them. I also am a Delphi/Pascal primary language developer, and I still do a lot of my development in that language. I also have developed in C/C++/C#, BASIC/VB, about 10 different kinds of Assembler, Java, and a number of scripting languages. Of those, I still prefer Delphi/Pascal. I've been learning Python and Ruby on an as-needed basis as well.
Being on my own all this time, the most important thing I have learned is how to learn, and to never stop learning something new. I figure I will be in the middle of learning something new when I keel over dead at the keyboard. I love IT and have done little else but study and work in this field.
In the last few years, I have been changing my career focus a bit from industrial and scientific projects over to entertainment. Even at this stage, I plan to develop some really fun games, leveraging my knowledge and experience from other areas as much as possible. I may never make anything that is a "hit", but that's not why I am doing it. I'm doing it because it is what I want to do, and where I want to be. I want to make something fun that *I* want to play; if someone else also likes it, then bonus!
At my age, I may not be the fastest coder in the world, and I have my share of personal demons (most of them not age-related) that I have to fight in order to get things done, but I would put my work product up against anyone's. I also know and accept that there will be age-related decline from here on out, but I don't care. I will keep doing my best until I can't do anything anymore (because I am dead). It is all I know how to do (well, anyway) and all I love to do, so that's what I will do.
Now, as for your questions:
"Should I try to learn web development (html, xhtml, css, php, python, ruby)? Should I learn Java and/or C#?"
If you want to do something in those languages, or are just curious, sure! Why not?
"Or am I too old to learn and work a new language?"
You're never simply "too old" to learn anything. It may take you longer, and you might not ever get as good at it as someone who cut their teeth on it when they were in their teens, but that won't stop you from being functionally literate enough in it to be useful.
One thing I should point out right now is that, by mastering one of the more complex "mainstream" languages, learning any other programming language is ten times easier, simply because there are few fundamental differences between programming languages besides syntax and API, and both of those are easy to pick up or just keep a "pocket" reference handy. After you have learned to become proficient in several modern/complex languages, you've pretty much been exposed to the gamut of paradigms across pretty much every language out there. Picking up new ones after that point is little more than learning a new paint coating technique; building the rest of the car is still pretty much the same -- engine, drive train, etc.
"Should I go back to PM work even if I do not like it that much?"
Well, my current situation doesn't lend well to this suggestion, since you're likely going to be working for someone else, rather than yourself, but my suggestion is to do the greatest combination of 1) what you like the most, and 2) what you feel you are best at doing for the people writing your paycheck. If those two are in conflict, my suggestion is to change the situation surrounding the latter, because you aren't likely to be able to change the former. In addition, doing something you hate just for a paycheck probably means that you won't do a very good job of it in the long run, and in that case, you aren't serving anyone's best interests, including especially your own.
Ever since bnetd, Blizzard has been completely self-absorbed in their own stupidity when it comes to game design for their non-MMO products. There is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON why they can't both have an offline single-player game and an online multi-player game which is fully secure where they can have their goddamned RMT garbage. They could even support LAN gaming and alternate ladder server modes, and everyone would be happy.
Sure, you're not going to be able to take your SP/LAN characters into MMO/MP mode, but so what? If you want to play in MMO mode, then play in MMO mode. Don't try to force every possible play mode into MMO mode and disenfranchise a significant percentage of your player base.
and I don't want to hear the bullshit about the "but everyone will pirate it". NONE of this will prevent people from pirating it, or even running their own backend, just like what they did to bnetd did nothing to stop the development and proliferation of alternate ladder servers and pirating of WC3. It won't stop the modding community, because the modding community will find a way to make mods.
Ultimately, I don't care what they do. I haven't owned a Blizzard product in over a decade, and they will never get another penny of my money ever again anyway, so they can feel free to fuck over their "loyal" fans however much they like. What they can't do, however, is to piss down my back and tell me it's raining by attempting to pass off the bullshit that it is "better for everyone", or that it is "the only viable route for games going forward".
The more they tighten their grip, the more gamers (and profits) they will squeeze between their fingers.
Generally, when I see someone "who worked on the original X super-product" say "X super-product is going the way of (insert antique technology reference here)", invariably I read it as "I'm spent; where's my retirement check?".
The PC isn't your grandfather's PC anymore. It has evolved, and will continue to evolve. That said, it isn't going anywhere, because it is a nonsensical comparison in the first place.
So, yeah, a has-been attempting to get that last 15 minutes for his myopic and geriatric tech punditry. Whee.
I don't think so. I can easily arrange a secure backchannel method with those I would sign for, free from MITM attacks, where I am as 100% certain as I would be if I were doing it in person with them.
SSL has numerous applications and needs that it serves. What we really need is a graduated system of "validity" which allows for things that don't need the "uber-valid" level of certs to operate.
Secondly, the long-standing ripoff in terms of costs extracted from this system are a symptom of this problem, creating and maintaining a monopoly-level stranglehold on doing things that don't need to cost nearly as much as they do.
Personally, I would prefer a decentralized web-of-trust kind of system for all but the highest level of confidence (maybe even for that, too, but I can envision a necessity to still centralize the absolute top layer).
Slashdot Mirror
False analogy, because considering the source is actually important to determining a solution in the case of AGW.
The question of whether humans are responsible is important, because it is used as an excuse to eliminate some very important remediation methods. Namely, stop burning fossil fuels.
Except for:
1) None of the scientists ever said "only university-trained scientists can understand the data".
2) All of the science was done openly with all the cards on the table. Published papers are, well, published.
3) You could always discover the funding sources for the vast majority of all scientists, because most of them are required to disclose it.
4) Vanishingly little data was used that could be considered "tainted".
The only real difference between this research project and previous ones which came to the same conclusions was the personalities involved.
So, now you're claiming that you were born a climate denier? Otherwise, fortune has nothing to do with it.
Likely, people treated you exactly how you treated them. Maybe you should reflect on your past words by putting yourself in the shoes of the ones at whom they were directed. Might give you some important perspective and insight that will help you a little bit with that rather large chip on your shoulder.
The error in your statement is in using the word sceptics(sic). True skeptics can be convinced by evidence. Deniers, on the other hand, cannot ever be convinced, because they aren't opposing AGW based on evidence, but instead based on ideology.
Clue for you: It is still called "global warming" because, guess what? The globe is STILL warming. Get it?
Global warming is the mechanism. Climate change is the effect, INCLUDING record snowfalls (which are due to increased water vapor in the atmosphere from global warming) and cold snaps (which are due to altered polar oscillation/circulation patterns from global warming).
No one stopped calling it what it is, and the "climate change" terminolgy has been used just as long as the "global warming" terminology.
Oh, please. Sore loser much?
You chose a side based on faulty premises and encountered resistance. Poor baby. Grow up, man up, accept you were wrong, and get busy doing the right thing for a change.
Once you mature a little bit, you'll likely find a mountain of acceptance from other mature individuals.
Reporting on an event consisting of the release of preliminary results for a much-anticipated study that are clearly identified as preliminary results hardly needs to be agenda-driven. It's a news-worthy event. Just like the peer-review results of the study will be a news-worthy event.
Put your big, ugly bias back under your big, ugly hat. k?
Perhaps they want a wheel that does something all the other wheels don't do.
Besides, what's wrong with making your own wheels? What's wrong with making something somewhere else but China for a change?
It is not possible for /. articles to be taken less seriously.
Even before the vastly overhyped Network Computer, there has been this argument that "local storage is going away" to be replaced by some centrally-managed system over infinitely-fast network connections. The "cloud" metaphor is simply the latest incarnation of this unbelievably pollyanna-ish view of the future of computing platforms and all the applications built on them.
It is only people who have no clue about how "the rest of the platform" works who keep hyping this stupidity.
OK, I LOLed at that.
Good one. :)
I'd still buy several of them for the inevitable FOSS hobbyist project to do some cool things with them.
Something else I should point out is that you have a tremendous amount of practical experience that is immensely valuable. That gives you a big edge on younger programmers, simply because there are many important lessons that can only be learned through experience. As such, even with the decline of age, you will probably still be able to code circles around lesser experienced folks for some time to come because you know to do things they've yet to figure out (and that "figuring out" part often takes a LOT of time) and you also know a lot of the shortcuts to getting things done.
I don't know whether they've been jaded by the industry or their own failings, but here's my take:
I'm 46 now. I have pretty much run my own business for most of my career, so I've been able to pick and choose jobs based on my own personal desires and needs, rather than being forced to "take what I can get" from the "industry". I have pretty much "done it all", when it comes to various categories of IT, but I prefer programming the most, since I started out in it. I have a number of specialties that people depend on me for, and they are very happy with what I have done for them. I also am a Delphi/Pascal primary language developer, and I still do a lot of my development in that language. I also have developed in C/C++/C#, BASIC/VB, about 10 different kinds of Assembler, Java, and a number of scripting languages. Of those, I still prefer Delphi/Pascal. I've been learning Python and Ruby on an as-needed basis as well.
Being on my own all this time, the most important thing I have learned is how to learn, and to never stop learning something new. I figure I will be in the middle of learning something new when I keel over dead at the keyboard. I love IT and have done little else but study and work in this field.
In the last few years, I have been changing my career focus a bit from industrial and scientific projects over to entertainment. Even at this stage, I plan to develop some really fun games, leveraging my knowledge and experience from other areas as much as possible. I may never make anything that is a "hit", but that's not why I am doing it. I'm doing it because it is what I want to do, and where I want to be. I want to make something fun that *I* want to play; if someone else also likes it, then bonus!
At my age, I may not be the fastest coder in the world, and I have my share of personal demons (most of them not age-related) that I have to fight in order to get things done, but I would put my work product up against anyone's. I also know and accept that there will be age-related decline from here on out, but I don't care. I will keep doing my best until I can't do anything anymore (because I am dead). It is all I know how to do (well, anyway) and all I love to do, so that's what I will do.
Now, as for your questions:
"Should I try to learn web development (html, xhtml, css, php, python, ruby)? Should I learn Java and/or C#?"
If you want to do something in those languages, or are just curious, sure! Why not?
"Or am I too old to learn and work a new language?"
You're never simply "too old" to learn anything. It may take you longer, and you might not ever get as good at it as someone who cut their teeth on it when they were in their teens, but that won't stop you from being functionally literate enough in it to be useful.
One thing I should point out right now is that, by mastering one of the more complex "mainstream" languages, learning any other programming language is ten times easier, simply because there are few fundamental differences between programming languages besides syntax and API, and both of those are easy to pick up or just keep a "pocket" reference handy. After you have learned to become proficient in several modern/complex languages, you've pretty much been exposed to the gamut of paradigms across pretty much every language out there. Picking up new ones after that point is little more than learning a new paint coating technique; building the rest of the car is still pretty much the same -- engine, drive train, etc.
"Should I go back to PM work even if I do not like it that much?"
Well, my current situation doesn't lend well to this suggestion, since you're likely going to be working for someone else, rather than yourself, but my suggestion is to do the greatest combination of 1) what you like the most, and 2) what you feel you are best at doing for the people writing your paycheck. If those two are in conflict, my suggestion is to change the situation surrounding the latter, because you aren't likely to be able to change the former. In addition, doing something you hate just for a paycheck probably means that you won't do a very good job of it in the long run, and in that case, you aren't serving anyone's best interests, including especially your own.
Ever since bnetd, Blizzard has been completely self-absorbed in their own stupidity when it comes to game design for their non-MMO products. There is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON why they can't both have an offline single-player game and an online multi-player game which is fully secure where they can have their goddamned RMT garbage. They could even support LAN gaming and alternate ladder server modes, and everyone would be happy.
Sure, you're not going to be able to take your SP/LAN characters into MMO/MP mode, but so what? If you want to play in MMO mode, then play in MMO mode. Don't try to force every possible play mode into MMO mode and disenfranchise a significant percentage of your player base.
and I don't want to hear the bullshit about the "but everyone will pirate it". NONE of this will prevent people from pirating it, or even running their own backend, just like what they did to bnetd did nothing to stop the development and proliferation of alternate ladder servers and pirating of WC3. It won't stop the modding community, because the modding community will find a way to make mods.
Ultimately, I don't care what they do. I haven't owned a Blizzard product in over a decade, and they will never get another penny of my money ever again anyway, so they can feel free to fuck over their "loyal" fans however much they like. What they can't do, however, is to piss down my back and tell me it's raining by attempting to pass off the bullshit that it is "better for everyone", or that it is "the only viable route for games going forward".
The more they tighten their grip, the more gamers (and profits) they will squeeze between their fingers.
Generally, when I see someone "who worked on the original X super-product" say "X super-product is going the way of (insert antique technology reference here)", invariably I read it as "I'm spent; where's my retirement check?".
The PC isn't your grandfather's PC anymore. It has evolved, and will continue to evolve. That said, it isn't going anywhere, because it is a nonsensical comparison in the first place.
So, yeah, a has-been attempting to get that last 15 minutes for his myopic and geriatric tech punditry. Whee.
Then it seems you're just as likely to be correct in your prediction as he is.
Go figure.
My Farcebook account URL is /dev/null
C'mon, surely you can predict my next FB friend; you claimed to be able to do it, after all.
Idiot.
Seriously, Farcebook??
I'm all for seeing FB disintegrated via beam shooting from my index finger, but why bother? It's already heading into the sunset.
Maybe they think they will just give it one good swift kick in the ass before the door does its job on FB's way out. Probably that.
I don't think so. I can easily arrange a secure backchannel method with those I would sign for, free from MITM attacks, where I am as 100% certain as I would be if I were doing it in person with them.
It needs to go away.
SSL has numerous applications and needs that it serves. What we really need is a graduated system of "validity" which allows for things that don't need the "uber-valid" level of certs to operate.
Secondly, the long-standing ripoff in terms of costs extracted from this system are a symptom of this problem, creating and maintaining a monopoly-level stranglehold on doing things that don't need to cost nearly as much as they do.
Personally, I would prefer a decentralized web-of-trust kind of system for all but the highest level of confidence (maybe even for that, too, but I can envision a necessity to still centralize the absolute top layer).
I remember our interpretation of their acronym:
Fscking Game's Unplayable
Maybe he's speaking from first-hand experience.
No, but his repeated ineptitude regarding his own work should cast a bit of doubt on what he says.
I hope that is not an ill omen.... .
"Randroids".. heh
I like that. :)