Since you've given such a detailed response... now that I go over your original post again, I can see what your actual point is. (The "technical schlong" reference threw me.)
There are indeed plenty of organizations that do not ascribe to the principles that you've elaborated on. There are even more that do follow them for most of the development process, but run things differently at their most basic levels. (The very place where Brooks developed the OS/360 architecture is one of them.) In these places it's widely thought that the only necessary communication is I/O. Once the required input and the desired output are communicated across, a function is written by the programmer to do the work. The programmers in such places have no view into the overall project they are working on, and may not even know what the project is. The functions may be simple or elaborate, varied or homogeneous... to these organizations it does not matter as long as they are done. Such basics as code optimization and reliability are occasionally (some would argue more frequently) thrown out the window in favor of assembling a product fast enough to beat competitors to market.
An assembly line mentality it may be, but unfortunately (this is in my experience) that's how things are currently done in many large US companies. In such an environment, cheap(er) labor is preferred over communications skills, or even more skillful programming in some instances.
Of course, I still think 115K is a high enough ceiling, for this day and age, if one is going to be set. The arguments for or against having a ceiling at all are varied and I'm certain there are many good, reasonable places to stand on both sides of the issue. I currently haven't read enough (or been interested enough) to make a concrete decision about it. *shrug*
IMO your posts over the past few days were beginning to get better until this little gem came along.
I agree that English/communication skills don't matter very much when it comes to development IF you're dealing with low-level coding on large projects (churning out function after function); However, I don't think that's what's being discussed here.
120K isn't exactly "sweat shop" money, nor is half that number. Personally, I think that any tech worth more than that could find somewhere else to work quite easily. The US is not the only place in the world that has good tech jobs.
How does this hurt Copyleft & Open Source?
on
UCITA is passed
·
· Score: 1
I'm going to side with the "big" software companies on this one and back the UCITA all the way! Why? Because it does nothing but make Copyleft and Open Source more valid approaches to making and distributing software. The more fascist the shrinkwrapped licensing method seems the better, IMO. Does anyone see any reason why this wouldn't be the case? LouZiffer
The experiments described in the article you linked to seem rather flawed to me. Simply because a person remembers enough about a particular topic or situation to answer a True/False question correctly does not imply that what is remembered itself occupies one "bit" of memory. What they seem to be measuring is retention rate in the number of memories retained per second, but has nothing to do with the true amount (in bits) of information that is retained in a single memory.
The answer they give (2 memories/second, 10^9 memories in a lifetime) doesn't seem to be the actual memory space in bits at all. It seems more related to the actual number of specific non-related memories retained in a lifetime. If one could possibly derive an arbitrary number for the amount of actual information (bit-wise) contained in a "memory", perhaps that information would be more useful.
Why I consider DIVX a bad idea.
on
DIVX is dead
·
· Score: 1
I'll readily agree that using the privacy issue as a reason not to buy DIVX is a joke; However, DIVX was still not for me... here's why: When I go to purchase a physical product (not a service) I tend to assume ownership of whatever I am purchasing, whether it is a licensed product (such as non open sourced software or a movie) or not. Being able to use or purvey that product at my own discretion is a freedom that I enjoy. I am liable for copying certain products or using them in a certain manner, but that responsibility rests upon my shoulders. I am not forced to conform if I am willing to pay the consequences for non-conformance. DIVX strips that responsibility from me as a consumer. I am bound to pay as long as I own the product and still wish to use it, without regard for the amount that I have paid in the past. It is a pay-per-view service that has taken on the physical guise of a product that takes up space in my home. As a substitute for an actual physical product (DVD) that I can own and use as I see fit, DIVX is flawed simply because it is not just a physical product. The competition for DIVX isn't on some shelf in a Best Buy or Wal-Mart, it's traveling over copper wires to people's cable boxes in the form of pay-per-view. Imagine a publisher trying to sell special books. Any time wished to read them, you call up a toll free number and buy a code good for a weeks worth of reading. The idea may seem silly and even slightly offensive to some, but to me that's just a step away from DIVX.
Java seems to be the latest technology that is taking the computer industry by storm. Is there a port of the Java VM and JDK to the Linux platform and where can I get it? How do you feel that Java can benefit Linux and vice versa?'
Name: ss04.nc.us.ibm.com
Address: 32.97.136.234
That's IBM's proxy server, used by many thousands of individuals working for IBM in North Carolina (RTP, Charlotte, Raleigh, etc.) to get to the outside world.
Due to recent developments at IBM (that you all know about), there is an increased personal awareness of Linux and news regarding Linux among individuals working here. There are also a lot of Java developers in RTP.
This question is most probably from an interested developer that has heard about Linux and wishes to learn more. I'd think that almost anyone with Linux experience would know that a JDK has existed for quite some time now.
Slashdot Mirror
There are indeed plenty of organizations that do not ascribe to the principles that you've elaborated on. There are even more that do follow them for most of the development process, but run things differently at their most basic levels. (The very place where Brooks developed the OS/360 architecture is one of them.) In these places it's widely thought that the only necessary communication is I/O. Once the required input and the desired output are communicated across, a function is written by the programmer to do the work. The programmers in such places have no view into the overall project they are working on, and may not even know what the project is. The functions may be simple or elaborate, varied or homogeneous... to these organizations it does not matter as long as they are done. Such basics as code optimization and reliability are occasionally (some would argue more frequently) thrown out the window in favor of assembling a product fast enough to beat competitors to market.
An assembly line mentality it may be, but unfortunately (this is in my experience) that's how things are currently done in many large US companies. In such an environment, cheap(er) labor is preferred over communications skills, or even more skillful programming in some instances.
Of course, I still think 115K is a high enough ceiling, for this day and age, if one is going to be set. The arguments for or against having a ceiling at all are varied and I'm certain there are many good, reasonable places to stand on both sides of the issue. I currently haven't read enough (or been interested enough) to make a concrete decision about it. *shrug*
IMO your posts over the past few days were beginning to get better until this little gem came along.
I agree that English/communication skills don't matter very much when it comes to development IF you're dealing with low-level coding on large projects (churning out function after function); However, I don't think that's what's being discussed here.
120K isn't exactly "sweat shop" money, nor is half that number. Personally, I think that any tech worth more than that could find somewhere else to work quite easily. The US is not the only place in the world that has good tech jobs.
I'm going to side with the "big" software companies on this one and back the UCITA all the way! Why? Because it does nothing but make Copyleft and Open Source more valid approaches to making and distributing software. The more fascist the shrinkwrapped licensing method seems the better, IMO. Does anyone see any reason why this wouldn't be the case? LouZiffer
The experiments described in the article you linked to seem rather flawed to me. Simply because a person remembers enough about a particular topic or situation to answer a True/False question correctly does not imply that what is remembered itself occupies one "bit" of memory. What they seem to be measuring is retention rate in the number of memories retained per second, but has nothing to do with the true amount (in bits) of information that is retained in a single memory.
The answer they give (2 memories/second, 10^9 memories in a lifetime) doesn't seem to be the actual memory space in bits at all. It seems more related to the actual number of specific non-related memories retained in a lifetime. If one could possibly derive an arbitrary number for the amount of actual information (bit-wise) contained in a "memory", perhaps that information would be more useful.
I'll readily agree that using the privacy issue as a reason not to buy DIVX is a joke; However, DIVX was still not for me... here's why: When I go to purchase a physical product (not a service) I tend to assume ownership of whatever I am purchasing, whether it is a licensed product (such as non open sourced software or a movie) or not. Being able to use or purvey that product at my own discretion is a freedom that I enjoy. I am liable for copying certain products or using them in a certain manner, but that responsibility rests upon my shoulders. I am not forced to conform if I am willing to pay the consequences for non-conformance. DIVX strips that responsibility from me as a consumer. I am bound to pay as long as I own the product and still wish to use it, without regard for the amount that I have paid in the past. It is a pay-per-view service that has taken on the physical guise of a product that takes up space in my home. As a substitute for an actual physical product (DVD) that I can own and use as I see fit, DIVX is flawed simply because it is not just a physical product. The competition for DIVX isn't on some shelf in a Best Buy or Wal-Mart, it's traveling over copper wires to people's cable boxes in the form of pay-per-view. Imagine a publisher trying to sell special books. Any time wished to read them, you call up a toll free number and buy a code good for a weeks worth of reading. The idea may seem silly and even slightly offensive to some, but to me that's just a step away from DIVX.
Java seems to be the latest technology that is taking the computer industry by storm. Is there a port of the Java VM and JDK to the Linux platform and where can I get it? How do you feel that Java can benefit Linux and vice versa?'
Name: ss04.nc.us.ibm.com
Address: 32.97.136.234
That's IBM's proxy server, used by many thousands of individuals working for IBM in North Carolina (RTP, Charlotte, Raleigh, etc.) to get to the outside world.
Due to recent developments at IBM (that you all know about), there is an increased personal awareness of Linux and news regarding Linux among individuals working here. There are also a lot of Java developers in RTP.
This question is most probably from an interested developer that has heard about Linux and wishes to learn more. I'd think that almost anyone with Linux experience would know that a JDK has existed for quite some time now.