Modesty apart, I am kind of good at developing data parsing/management algorithms completely from scratch. I was also developing that tool for my personal use, not for the general public/any situation. I was working on it just during some days and, when quitting it (as commented above, because of the underlying speech-recognition failed a lot when trying to recognise variable names), I had a reasonably good approach in place.
It was able to open the file I wanted, insert/edit specific parts in the right location (well... kind of, as far as it wasn't able to recognise the function/variable names), to change indentation and even to modify classifications (class/namespace). It was focused on a specific programming language and only at the file level. I was also planning to not care about complex programming-language features; just about scope, variables, methods, conditions, loops, etc.
5.9% means it still gets more than 1 in 20 things wrong
Thanks for the mathematical lesson, but I kind of knew that:). What I meant was that my overall experience was way much worse than 1 in 20; it was almost 1 in 2. When using the English version for proper/in-dictionary English words, it performed kind of OK (1 in 5/10? when using simple words; much worse with complex words). But the biggest problem was non-existent/other-language words; for example: "var1" or "thatfunction", its performance on that front was horrible and this was what made me quit that development. It was plainly unable of recognising random variable names.
Second, there's a huge difference between standard language and specialist syntax. With programming, you're likely going to want a LOT of special formatting that you can type without thinking but it's cumbersome to communicate via speech in a way that won't confuse a speech recognition engine.
No. This wasn't the problem. I developed it such that I was merely inputting single (pretty simple) words. The biggest problem (on top of my accent) was the aforementioned non-existing words. I was able to do pretty much everything I wanted without problems, except including/editing random words (variable names).
And finally - so long as they don't have a related disability - a proficient typist can already type about as fast as they can form decent code in their head
The final goal wasn't to write quicker code or to cover any inability, but to make my programming experience more comfortable (+ giving a shot at something I wasn't too experienced in; I do this kind of things quite often). Plainly saying "open project X", "edit file Y", "change var1 to var2" with my hands in my pockets:)
a) This is about real human launguages, not programming languages
??!!! I will repeat it again by using as simple words as I can. This will be the last time I will do it (+ most likely last time I will be talking to you if you have been logged in). Imagine that I want to create the following code (C# or Java):
void FunctionTest (int argumento) { }
This is code right? That code is formed by words (function/variable names). Rather than typing that words, I developed an application (I wrote code in a.NET programming language, because this is what you do to create an application, + relied on the in-built Microsoft speech-recognition engine) writing that code for me just from my voice. For example, rather than typing "void", I was saying "void" (+ my application was writing "void"). "Argumento" is a Spanish word, so when I was saying it that software recognised "argument" (the English equivalent). Have you now understood everything properly? If yes, please don't bother me anymore; if not, please, don't bother me anymore. Bye.
Some months ago, I did some tests with speech recognition software and my conclusion was that it is still too unreliable. My intention was to develop an application allowing me to write moderately complex code by voice (creating files and folders, including proper indentation, recognising functions, variables and other basic elements, etc. Basically, allowing me to write/edit the main parts of a random algorithm in certain language without touching the keyboard). I did test Microsoft in-built functionality (+ used one of Microsoft's.NET programming languages) and it wasn't even close to what "5.9% error rate" seems to indicate (almost perfect?).
In defence of the software, I have to say that my English accent isn't precisely excellent (some people say that it is "too thick" and other people just say "what?". LOL) and honestly I make a very little effort to pronounce properly. But this is also the problem with speech recognition: it is mostly focused on a specific language/accent/intonation. I was doing my tests in an English Windows version and this was the language for the default speech recognition (and adding a different one wasn't precisely straightforward).
I do perfectly understand the complexity associated with developing a reliable enough piece of software delivering what I was expecting; but this is precisely the reason why I looked for existing solutions rather than developing everything myself (what I do pretty often). In any case, my impression is that you can still not expect good enough reliability of (Microsoft's) speech recognition software, much less when mixing languages/accents up (particularly problematic situation: including Spanish words when talking in English). I might give a new shot at all this next year though.
Niños por favor, vayan a jugar a otro lado, los adultos queremos hablar.
Pretty good Spanish for whom I presume that isn't a native speaker.
It seems you guys have a "Cable pela'o" of some sort,
I am not getting this one though. I understand that it is slang in some Spanish-speaking country different than Spain (but "pelao", as short-form of "pelado", seems better than "pela'o"). I presume that it means that we are acting crazily or something like that. There is certainly something wrong with these other people (at least, with their understanding capabilities and expectations), but I plainly wrote a pretty soft and completely on-topic post which got the kind-of-attack of an individual who seems to have some problems with me (and, most likely, in general too) and, since then, am plainly replying to increasingly stupid comments. I have never been even slightly angry (not even disappointed with that guy/gal, as far as I know him/her from previous threads); I am plainly being extremely clear regarding the kind of invasive, stupid, fanatic, ignorant nonsense/people with whom I don't want to deal.
that somehow ended up as a reply to my post
No idea what you are talking about. I have been here all the time replying to the (self-invited) answerers (mostly with an unmotivatedly aggressive attitude) to my original post. This whole "problem" started because I shared my approach to deal with code versioning/backups, that weird/crazy/obsessed-with-me individual decided that my approach wasn't good and, despite having had a quite hard discussion in the past which any sensible person should have understood as "there is nothing to talk with that guy, let's better deal with other people", brought their limited understanding capabilities here and seriously believed that, regardless of my experience, having always got excellent results (= no hassle, no effort, no problems) and, most important, wanting to use said proceeding, thought that could "convince me" (= being angry if I didn't do what s/he was saying me to do) to use a different approach. All this by bearing in mind that we are talking about something as simple and non-problematic, as plainly using software!! And that I am quite flexible on what to use regarding the conditions. It has been something like you mostly using editor A (+ sometimes other ones) and a (self-invited) person comes to you and says that you have to use editor B, that nothing else is acceptable!?
And with no context to boot.
There you have your context, but please don't take this as an invitation to extend more something which I consider completely and absolutely stupid since the first moment. I guess that that individual (who clearly have some issues with me or in general, I don’t really care) have written comments somewhere else. No idea what s/he said and I don't care. For me, that person is completely crazy in the sense that I don't want to deal with him/her, but continues coming to me with their nonsensical expectations (and my reactions are likely to keep getting increasingly more aggressive).
I might try to mediate
I am a sensible, reasonable (and even cold, if you wish) enough person to not need any kind of mediation when dealing with any other person. By assuming that there are two types of people, the ones with whom it is possible to talk and the ones with whom this isn't an option; I plainly don’t want to deal with the second type. Currently, I am being extremely clear regarding my position with respect to that second type. To speed up the understanding process (some people have serious problems to understand concepts like this; no idea why! Surprisingly, they usually have extremely unappealing behaviours, but they are convinced that anyone else have to like them?!), I have no problem in being as (even hurtfully) clear as required. If you want to help someone, talk to that person and make
Actually, you're wrong, he's right. You are also astonishingly ignorant for someone working in tech.
?! I am wrong on what? On following a proceeding with which I am more comfortable (and using any other one whenever I feel like doing it, because we are talking about using software!!! There is no difficulty on doing such a thing, at least not if you have a bit of knowledge) and defending myself from the random attack (well... not exactly; unless that killing me by sadness might be considered an aggression) of a crazy individual which is apparently obsessed with me (look at all our previous interactions; s/he has always started and always aggressively and always not understanding anything; a quite pathetic spectacle if you ask my opinion). Ignorant of what?! Where have I said anything which denotes my ignorance on any front? Are you even able to understand all the words in the sentence you just wrote?
I will tell you what I see here: you are either a friend (or part of the groups of fanatics of which s/he is part of) or that same other individual; you are most likely not even a programmer ("working in tech" sounds like the kind of generic meaning-nothing resource that a person with low-to-no actual knowledge but either dishonest or in complete denial uses because of thinking that it seems to indicate that knows what is talking about. Pretty much like that other individual: systematically relying on generic expressions only indicating ignorance rather than knowledge; FYI, I am senior programmer and an engineer) and, just because of this completely-uncalled, pointless and ridiculous comment (which also tells about your ideas regarding fanaticism, arbitrariness and many-against-1 scenarios), I am also sure that you are a true asshole. You are certainly all what is wrong with nowadays software development ("tech workers" as you call them): extremely ignorant fanatics spending all their time attacking everyone for no sensible reason; constantly lying, showing what they don't have, doubting on anything, not having even basic knowledge (but probably getting lots of money on exchange of shitty software, what seems a bubble which will most likely explode at some point). Your kind is the reason why I don't want to contribute/participate in online programming forums at all. Now, please, go with that other half person somewhere else to say these abstract sentences to the only audience which tolerates them (other ignorant idiots like you), to continue thinking that you have any kind of opinion/authority (and that you saying "it is like this" has any meaning at all) and don't bother me with your pathetic nonsense anymore.
I am looking forward to it. I am always happy to prove bully-wannabes how ridiculous and useless are their petty attempts at trying to impose their arbitrary nonsense on others.
Just in case it isn't evident to everyone: that AC is clearly joking, but I am not.
This is the first and last part which I read from your new likely-to-further-prove-your-extremely-poor-understanding-skills-and-surprisingly-limited-knowledge-about-almost-anything. I will try to never reply to your incoherent nonsense again, here or the next time you decide to arbitrarily and unilaterally start talking to me.
The only goal of a company is to become wealthier regardless of anything else. Usually, the upper managerial staff tend to have kind of (because I guess that they have some limits, after all they are human beings; at least, this is what someone told me once. LOL) similar expectations. Individual citizens are too weak to fight these greedy and usually aggressive-to-anyone-else attitudes and this is where governments and legislations come in. Companies only do good if they are forced to do so. Governmental bodies might also act wrongly, but this isn't part of their essence; they work for the citizens (which might remove them) and the checks and balances you mention only apply to them.
If you forget about these differences private/public, pro-citizen/pro-profit, controlled/independent, etc. and start believing that a company, any company, will voluntarily do anything for you, for the greater good; that they will protect you from whatever fear you have on exchange of nothing; that they will fairly use a big power on others; etc. In that case, I am afraid that you have a serious misconception about the world, how it works and how it is allowed to continue working. Private companies and capital can continue trying to pull some strings (certainly not mine) in the shadows, to grow at the expense of greediness, corruption and ignorance, to even force whole governments to do what they want, but this is it. No sensible legislation (not one I can respect or recognise as such) will ever allow private interests to conclusively decide what behaviours are right/wrong. Companies can continue playing dirty, trying to trick the system and similar, but I will never recognise even a tiny bit of their authority. I will not even recognise the authority of any legal system having problems to understand ideas which I consider evident.
It certainly matters where it has to matter, at least in my country: within the legal system, the only one which can determine whether I am guilty/innocent of whatever, and associated instances (e.g., police protecting my rights against the arbitrariness of invasive nobodies, including unfairly-acting police staff).
dare speak the truth you will be mislabelled, slandered and attacked
I always speak the truth and am not afraid of almost anything. Those unfairly mislabelling should be the ones being afraid of the consequences of their actions (mainly when dealing with me because I take unfairness very personally:)), which will come sooner or later. Additionally and if there is any positive aspect to the nowadays systematic information storage and privacy violations, it might be that people acting fairly have even less to be afraid of: detailed information about almost any event is likely to be available in case of being required. He-said-she-said scenarios are every day less likely to avoid reaching an objective assessment of the given situation, where the innocent/guilty parties will be favoured/punished.
after slandering and firing an employee for authoring a pro-diversity memo
Without being interested in getting involved in a discussion about that incident or any other issue on these lines, the truth is that this person did generically label a big number of people (women performing certain work). Google is free of not liking that and firing him, although this decision might be punished if proven illegal. In any case and for what matters here, I will never be in such a situation as far as I truly don't believe that you can generically label a so heterogeneous group of people, not even under these specific probably-behaviour-homogenising conditions (i.e., performing a similar work for the same company). As said in my previous comment, I treat everyone individually and mainly care about their current behaviours (+ expect them to be responsible for all their past actions).
No person or corporation can unilaterally decide who is committing a crime and punish the corresponding authors (being in such a database might become an important punishment). In any civilised society, the process should consist in: reasonable evidence of a behaviour against the (ideally fair) law; (ideally fair) trial; and condemn also stating the level of publicity of the corresponding crime/punishment. Not even government-related bodies (e.g., police or public organisations) can avoid that proceeding without facing consequences. Just the fact of even considering the option of allowing private, egoist/pro-profit interests to be in such a judge-jury-executioner position is completely unacceptable. They shouldn't even have proposed such a thing and the corresponding legal bodies shouldn't allow ideas on these lines to ever become a reality.
Clarification for anyone interested: I don't consider myself a potential victim of this kind of things. I am a hate-free person with virtually no prejudices of any kind. Sometimes, I can have a quite aggressive attitude, but always as a reaction to a previous attack and by focusing on the given personality (e.g., "you are an idiot") rather than on generic features like ethnicity, gender, religion, etc. In summary, this post isn't precisely meant to protect myself, but to contribute towards avoiding the ridiculous nonsense of granting more unfair power to doing-everything-for-their-own-growth corporations.
And why don't you use a version control system instead of a set of back up directories?
As usual (after our last incident, I don't know why you are here at all, but up to you), you don't seem to get the idea right. See, when you program in whatever language (compiled/non-compiled, old/new, web/desktop, etc.), you are relying on a root directory where all your files are stored. This is the same when you use an online/offline control system/git whatever; the difference is that, in that case, a set of applications manages that root folder and eventually creates backups/secondary folders, and you have to ultimately trust that application + the machine storing those files. I started my programming career as a simulation engineer (emissions in IC engines) and a big part of that work involved to perform lots simulations (= running software usually taking quite long under different input scenarios); there I got used to this approach of replicating folders for running/developing/analysing not just raw data, but also code (some of the simulations required recompiling some parts). I brought that approach to my software development work and have been evolving it since then, such that it is now extremely reliable, secure and hassle-free.
Logically, I also rely on more standardised approaches/code controls at many different points and for different purposes (e.g., public repositories, projects where I have to use a code control/sharing software, etc.). I don't spend any appreciable amount of time/effort on backuping my code, I have never lost anything of value (that comment about an hour of work was almost a joke) and I am very happy with my current proceeding. In one week of a standard development, I can have around 20 different folders (representing relevant points of that development; note that these are 20 entities that can be managed individually, as opposed to 20 internal differences only recognised by the given control software) in 4-5 different hard-drives, which I can recover and start using almost immediately. You are suggesting me to replace (or plainly criticising it?) that proceeding (which I have been using for over the last 8 years) with a blind trust in a third-party tool (because logically I will not develop a code control software; I did develop all my backup applications though) which will be intrinsically less safe (as commented, just one folder; or perhaps more but managed internally and without me having anything to say there), just because this is what you do (or the only proceeding you can think of?) what makes you think that everyone else should do exactly the same regardless of their conditions, experience, the kind of work they perform and, even much more importantly, what they are feeling like doing? Pfff... Are you seriously still not getting that there is nothing for us to discuss? There are lots of people around, why not trying to talk to someone else?
When coding, I start working on a fresh set of files (make a copy of folder "1", rename to "2" and continue working on it) various times per day (it depends upon the complexity/importance of the development) and automatically duplicate the last set. And, in case of being particularly difficult/important, I store another copy in an external drive. I backup all relevant folders almost daily. Around twice a month, I do an external backup of my whole hard-drive.
Once, I made a mistake while doing the first backups and lost a whole hour of work. It was a horrible experience which I expect to never pass through again... And this guy loses 3 months of work in one click!! H*ly shi*! There aren't enough asterisks in the world to express so much pain. LOL.
This seems one of the most profitable business right now. Actually having/knowing doesn't seem to matter anymore. It is everywhere, much more in internet: fake followers ("I follow you if you follow me back" or paid followers, all the same), friends, references (people recommending technical skills in exchange of getting theirs recommended too or stars/likes), knowledge (trying to emulate/steal what other people did without even understanding what you are doing), ideas (let's repeat 1000 times today's trendy whatever without even knowing what we are talking about), even fake feelings (people passing from extremely sad to extremely happy in minutes; or feeling attacked by non-existent meanings, even just by being proven wrong), etc.
I honestly don't get it: why making any effort to be part of nothing? To be liked by those with so worthless opinions? I prefer to be honest and fair, to have actual knowledge/learn/improve/accept my errors, to trust what is trustworthy and like what is likeable. I am not precisely too young (close to my 40s already!), but am forward-thinking (leftist, in case you are interested), adaptable and innovation-prone; I am not the kind of guy who is always remembering the good old days. But I am not liking at all what I am seeing lately (e.g., internet, software/programming knowledge, extremely stupid investments, Hollywood, generic expectations, etc.): there is a systematic promotion of mediocrity, dishonesty, unfair impositions (trolling, unmotivatedly censoring anyone thinking even slightly differently, ignoring those not blindly accepting whatever half truth), also known as stupidity.
For anyone interested: I prefer to be alone, poor and ignored than participating in that circus of emptiness. I will continue (even more now than before) being completely honest, fair and only showing what I truly have/know; saying "I like" to what I really like while I am liking it; not being afraid of random crazy misinterpretations of each single word I say. I will not tolerate any unjust imposition or any other output of this dictatorship of appearances/ignorance.
This and quite a few comments below are wrong. Both kilograms and pounds measure mass. Weight is another name for force, which is measured in different units in both systems. There are force units which have similar names to their mass counter-parts (e.g., kilogram-force or pound-force). Conventionally, we talk about kilograms/pounds and mass/weight almost interchangeably, but this is technically wrong.
COMPLETELY-MOTIVATED SELF-ADVERTISEMENT: I have developed completely from scratch a quite comprehensive unit-parsing library in C# (converted to Java): UnitParser (first part of FlexibleParser). It is open source and the files dealing with basic unit classifications are quite user-friendly. For example, unit names in C# and Java.
Domain sharks routinely snatch up expired domains, for several reasons: first, to extort money from the previous owner if the expiry was unintentional; second, under the assumption that if someone took the trouble to register it, it has some sort of value and they might make a profit selling it to a third party; and third, to gain ad revenue from any existing links or search results that might point to the expired domain.
First time I hear about these domain sharks! Thanks for the explanations! I am still happy with my decision, but all this sounds pretty problematic. I will certainly think carefully before letting any other domain name expire in the future.
Interesting, thanks. So, by putting together this with the ideas in the post below, I understand that GoDaddy (and perhaps other hosting providers) is some kind of middleman for domain-name speculators (or even perhaps a speculator itself)? Again curious and not too surprising. If there is a market for that, why not?
their speculation is to acquire the name as cheaply as possible. That means not paying you for it.
Are you saying that there are people whose work consists in keeping track of soon-to-expire domain names and, once expired, buying them just in case? It is curious, but not too surprising. Thanks for the info.
(Even though I am no grammar-or-any-other-kind-of nazi, I do recognise that am making many errors here lately. I am not sorry though and do invite anyone not liking what I write to not read it:))
Does anyone know how are expired domain names being management? I have recently let an old domain name expire. My hosting provider kept it during some days after the expiration, but now it is parked at godaddy.com (not my hosting provider). Has someone already bought that domain name via GoDaddy (?! anyone interested in it should have contacted me before, I guess) or is that a normal proceeding among hosting providers (buying/selling expired domain names)?
'vaccines causing problems as a misconception' doesn't imply that (you believe) vaccines don't cause problems
Perhaps not in general, but within this context should be clear. Saying that vaccines are fine as opposed to anti-vaccine people (who consider the whole vaccination idea bad) should be intuitively understood as good enough, what implies isolated cases being bad also included.
to name calling or insults was a breath of fresh air, and does you credit.
Thanks. Although honestly I don't see how a comment like yours could trigger any kind of insult. Because of your tiny (and completely reasonable) correction to my generic statement "vaccines are fine"? No sensible person should ever react aggressively to such a comment!
I understand that you can find many unmotivatedly-aggressive behaviours online, but perhaps you shouldn't normalise them by assuming that they are acceptable. Unreasonable, fanatic, disproportionately-aggressive, etc. people are all the same; it doesn't matter if they are left-/right-winged, support/attack what might make more/less sense, etc. When you stop trying to adequately understand others, start expecting your position to unilaterally prevail, start attacking anyone thinking differently or similar, you become the same kind of fanatic in my book and you get exactly the same amount of understanding from me (= none).
Are you suggesting, as seems implicit in your statement, that vaccines never cause problems?
No. I will never dare to use a word like never when describing a so wide reality; not even in case of having a deep knowledge about it, what's isn't even the case. My statement isn't implying such a thing, only your (mis)interpretation does. I was merely highlighting what is considered common knowledge in medicine since quite long time ago: vaccines are helpful. In any case, my true intention was to use this specific situation as a mere example to describe certain scenarios, where providing further (presumably sensible and reliable) knowledge doesn't help.
Think carefully, before you answer...
If you are implying that my answer might ironically denote a latent fanaticism, I wouldn’t be afraid of that. I am pretty much the opposite of a fanatic blindly believing in whatever. I am reasonably sure about my ideas on the vaccine front, but would find any problem to update my position in case of being required.
Slashdot Mirror
Modesty apart, I am kind of good at developing data parsing/management algorithms completely from scratch. I was also developing that tool for my personal use, not for the general public/any situation. I was working on it just during some days and, when quitting it (as commented above, because of the underlying speech-recognition failed a lot when trying to recognise variable names), I had a reasonably good approach in place.
It was able to open the file I wanted, insert/edit specific parts in the right location (well... kind of, as far as it wasn't able to recognise the function/variable names), to change indentation and even to modify classifications (class/namespace). It was focused on a specific programming language and only at the file level. I was also planning to not care about complex programming-language features; just about scope, variables, methods, conditions, loops, etc.
5.9% means it still gets more than 1 in 20 things wrong
Thanks for the mathematical lesson, but I kind of knew that :). What I meant was that my overall experience was way much worse than 1 in 20; it was almost 1 in 2. When using the English version for proper/in-dictionary English words, it performed kind of OK (1 in 5/10? when using simple words; much worse with complex words). But the biggest problem was non-existent/other-language words; for example: "var1" or "thatfunction", its performance on that front was horrible and this was what made me quit that development. It was plainly unable of recognising random variable names.
Second, there's a huge difference between standard language and specialist syntax. With programming, you're likely going to want a LOT of special formatting that you can type without thinking but it's cumbersome to communicate via speech in a way that won't confuse a speech recognition engine.
No. This wasn't the problem. I developed it such that I was merely inputting single (pretty simple) words. The biggest problem (on top of my accent) was the aforementioned non-existing words. I was able to do pretty much everything I wanted without problems, except including/editing random words (variable names).
And finally - so long as they don't have a related disability - a proficient typist can already type about as fast as they can form decent code in their head
The final goal wasn't to write quicker code or to cover any inability, but to make my programming experience more comfortable (+ giving a shot at something I wasn't too experienced in; I do this kind of things quite often). Plainly saying "open project X", "edit file Y", "change var1 to var2" with my hands in my pockets :)
Thanks. It is kind of nice to know that I am not the (whole) problem :)
a) This is about real human launguages, not programming languages
??!!! I will repeat it again by using as simple words as I can. This will be the last time I will do it (+ most likely last time I will be talking to you if you have been logged in). Imagine that I want to create the following code (C# or Java):
.NET programming language, because this is what you do to create an application, + relied on the in-built Microsoft speech-recognition engine) writing that code for me just from my voice. For example, rather than typing "void", I was saying "void" (+ my application was writing "void"). "Argumento" is a Spanish word, so when I was saying it that software recognised "argument" (the English equivalent). Have you now understood everything properly? If yes, please don't bother me anymore; if not, please, don't bother me anymore. Bye.
void FunctionTest (int argumento)
{
}
This is code right? That code is formed by words (function/variable names). Rather than typing that words, I developed an application (I wrote code in a
Some months ago, I did some tests with speech recognition software and my conclusion was that it is still too unreliable. My intention was to develop an application allowing me to write moderately complex code by voice (creating files and folders, including proper indentation, recognising functions, variables and other basic elements, etc. Basically, allowing me to write/edit the main parts of a random algorithm in certain language without touching the keyboard). I did test Microsoft in-built functionality (+ used one of Microsoft's .NET programming languages) and it wasn't even close to what "5.9% error rate" seems to indicate (almost perfect?).
In defence of the software, I have to say that my English accent isn't precisely excellent (some people say that it is "too thick" and other people just say "what?". LOL) and honestly I make a very little effort to pronounce properly. But this is also the problem with speech recognition: it is mostly focused on a specific language/accent/intonation. I was doing my tests in an English Windows version and this was the language for the default speech recognition (and adding a different one wasn't precisely straightforward).
I do perfectly understand the complexity associated with developing a reliable enough piece of software delivering what I was expecting; but this is precisely the reason why I looked for existing solutions rather than developing everything myself (what I do pretty often). In any case, my impression is that you can still not expect good enough reliability of (Microsoft's) speech recognition software, much less when mixing languages/accents up (particularly problematic situation: including Spanish words when talking in English). I might give a new shot at all this next year though.
Niños por favor, vayan a jugar a otro lado, los adultos queremos hablar.
Pretty good Spanish for whom I presume that isn't a native speaker.
It seems you guys have a "Cable pela'o" of some sort,
I am not getting this one though. I understand that it is slang in some Spanish-speaking country different than Spain (but "pelao", as short-form of "pelado", seems better than "pela'o"). I presume that it means that we are acting crazily or something like that. There is certainly something wrong with these other people (at least, with their understanding capabilities and expectations), but I plainly wrote a pretty soft and completely on-topic post which got the kind-of-attack of an individual who seems to have some problems with me (and, most likely, in general too) and, since then, am plainly replying to increasingly stupid comments. I have never been even slightly angry (not even disappointed with that guy/gal, as far as I know him/her from previous threads); I am plainly being extremely clear regarding the kind of invasive, stupid, fanatic, ignorant nonsense/people with whom I don't want to deal.
that somehow ended up as a reply to my post
No idea what you are talking about. I have been here all the time replying to the (self-invited) answerers (mostly with an unmotivatedly aggressive attitude) to my original post. This whole "problem" started because I shared my approach to deal with code versioning/backups, that weird/crazy/obsessed-with-me individual decided that my approach wasn't good and, despite having had a quite hard discussion in the past which any sensible person should have understood as "there is nothing to talk with that guy, let's better deal with other people", brought their limited understanding capabilities here and seriously believed that, regardless of my experience, having always got excellent results (= no hassle, no effort, no problems) and, most important, wanting to use said proceeding, thought that could "convince me" (= being angry if I didn't do what s/he was saying me to do) to use a different approach. All this by bearing in mind that we are talking about something as simple and non-problematic, as plainly using software!! And that I am quite flexible on what to use regarding the conditions. It has been something like you mostly using editor A (+ sometimes other ones) and a (self-invited) person comes to you and says that you have to use editor B, that nothing else is acceptable!?
And with no context to boot.
There you have your context, but please don't take this as an invitation to extend more something which I consider completely and absolutely stupid since the first moment. I guess that that individual (who clearly have some issues with me or in general, I don’t really care) have written comments somewhere else. No idea what s/he said and I don't care. For me, that person is completely crazy in the sense that I don't want to deal with him/her, but continues coming to me with their nonsensical expectations (and my reactions are likely to keep getting increasingly more aggressive).
I might try to mediate
I am a sensible, reasonable (and even cold, if you wish) enough person to not need any kind of mediation when dealing with any other person. By assuming that there are two types of people, the ones with whom it is possible to talk and the ones with whom this isn't an option; I plainly don’t want to deal with the second type. Currently, I am being extremely clear regarding my position with respect to that second type. To speed up the understanding process (some people have serious problems to understand concepts like this; no idea why! Surprisingly, they usually have extremely unappealing behaviours, but they are convinced that anyone else have to like them?!), I have no problem in being as (even hurtfully) clear as required. If you want to help someone, talk to that person and make
Actually, you're wrong, he's right. You are also astonishingly ignorant for someone working in tech.
?! I am wrong on what? On following a proceeding with which I am more comfortable (and using any other one whenever I feel like doing it, because we are talking about using software!!! There is no difficulty on doing such a thing, at least not if you have a bit of knowledge) and defending myself from the random attack (well... not exactly; unless that killing me by sadness might be considered an aggression) of a crazy individual which is apparently obsessed with me (look at all our previous interactions; s/he has always started and always aggressively and always not understanding anything; a quite pathetic spectacle if you ask my opinion). Ignorant of what?! Where have I said anything which denotes my ignorance on any front? Are you even able to understand all the words in the sentence you just wrote?
I will tell you what I see here: you are either a friend (or part of the groups of fanatics of which s/he is part of) or that same other individual; you are most likely not even a programmer ("working in tech" sounds like the kind of generic meaning-nothing resource that a person with low-to-no actual knowledge but either dishonest or in complete denial uses because of thinking that it seems to indicate that knows what is talking about. Pretty much like that other individual: systematically relying on generic expressions only indicating ignorance rather than knowledge; FYI, I am senior programmer and an engineer) and, just because of this completely-uncalled, pointless and ridiculous comment (which also tells about your ideas regarding fanaticism, arbitrariness and many-against-1 scenarios), I am also sure that you are a true asshole. You are certainly all what is wrong with nowadays software development ("tech workers" as you call them): extremely ignorant fanatics spending all their time attacking everyone for no sensible reason; constantly lying, showing what they don't have, doubting on anything, not having even basic knowledge (but probably getting lots of money on exchange of shitty software, what seems a bubble which will most likely explode at some point). Your kind is the reason why I don't want to contribute/participate in online programming forums at all. Now, please, go with that other half person somewhere else to say these abstract sentences to the only audience which tolerates them (other ignorant idiots like you), to continue thinking that you have any kind of opinion/authority (and that you saying "it is like this" has any meaning at all) and don't bother me with your pathetic nonsense anymore.
You will be hearing from Us.
I am looking forward to it. I am always happy to prove bully-wannabes how ridiculous and useless are their petty attempts at trying to impose their arbitrary nonsense on others.
Just in case it isn't evident to everyone: that AC is clearly joking, but I am not.
So instead of learning how
This is the first and last part which I read from your new likely-to-further-prove-your-extremely-poor-understanding-skills-and-surprisingly-limited-knowledge-about-almost-anything. I will try to never reply to your incoherent nonsense again, here or the next time you decide to arbitrarily and unilaterally start talking to me.
The only goal of a company is to become wealthier regardless of anything else. Usually, the upper managerial staff tend to have kind of (because I guess that they have some limits, after all they are human beings; at least, this is what someone told me once. LOL) similar expectations. Individual citizens are too weak to fight these greedy and usually aggressive-to-anyone-else attitudes and this is where governments and legislations come in. Companies only do good if they are forced to do so. Governmental bodies might also act wrongly, but this isn't part of their essence; they work for the citizens (which might remove them) and the checks and balances you mention only apply to them.
If you forget about these differences private/public, pro-citizen/pro-profit, controlled/independent, etc. and start believing that a company, any company, will voluntarily do anything for you, for the greater good; that they will protect you from whatever fear you have on exchange of nothing; that they will fairly use a big power on others; etc. In that case, I am afraid that you have a serious misconception about the world, how it works and how it is allowed to continue working. Private companies and capital can continue trying to pull some strings (certainly not mine) in the shadows, to grow at the expense of greediness, corruption and ignorance, to even force whole governments to do what they want, but this is it. No sensible legislation (not one I can respect or recognise as such) will ever allow private interests to conclusively decide what behaviours are right/wrong. Companies can continue playing dirty, trying to trick the system and similar, but I will never recognise even a tiny bit of their authority. I will not even recognise the authority of any legal system having problems to understand ideas which I consider evident.
That doesn't matter
It certainly matters where it has to matter, at least in my country: within the legal system, the only one which can determine whether I am guilty/innocent of whatever, and associated instances (e.g., police protecting my rights against the arbitrariness of invasive nobodies, including unfairly-acting police staff).
dare speak the truth you will be mislabelled, slandered and attacked
I always speak the truth and am not afraid of almost anything. Those unfairly mislabelling should be the ones being afraid of the consequences of their actions (mainly when dealing with me because I take unfairness very personally :)), which will come sooner or later. Additionally and if there is any positive aspect to the nowadays systematic information storage and privacy violations, it might be that people acting fairly have even less to be afraid of: detailed information about almost any event is likely to be available in case of being required. He-said-she-said scenarios are every day less likely to avoid reaching an objective assessment of the given situation, where the innocent/guilty parties will be favoured/punished.
after slandering and firing an employee for authoring a pro-diversity memo
Without being interested in getting involved in a discussion about that incident or any other issue on these lines, the truth is that this person did generically label a big number of people (women performing certain work). Google is free of not liking that and firing him, although this decision might be punished if proven illegal. In any case and for what matters here, I will never be in such a situation as far as I truly don't believe that you can generically label a so heterogeneous group of people, not even under these specific probably-behaviour-homogenising conditions (i.e., performing a similar work for the same company). As said in my previous comment, I treat everyone individually and mainly care about their current behaviours (+ expect them to be responsible for all their past actions).
No person or corporation can unilaterally decide who is committing a crime and punish the corresponding authors (being in such a database might become an important punishment). In any civilised society, the process should consist in: reasonable evidence of a behaviour against the (ideally fair) law; (ideally fair) trial; and condemn also stating the level of publicity of the corresponding crime/punishment. Not even government-related bodies (e.g., police or public organisations) can avoid that proceeding without facing consequences. Just the fact of even considering the option of allowing private, egoist/pro-profit interests to be in such a judge-jury-executioner position is completely unacceptable. They shouldn't even have proposed such a thing and the corresponding legal bodies shouldn't allow ideas on these lines to ever become a reality.
Clarification for anyone interested: I don't consider myself a potential victim of this kind of things. I am a hate-free person with virtually no prejudices of any kind. Sometimes, I can have a quite aggressive attitude, but always as a reaction to a previous attack and by focusing on the given personality (e.g., "you are an idiot") rather than on generic features like ethnicity, gender, religion, etc. In summary, this post isn't precisely meant to protect myself, but to contribute towards avoiding the ridiculous nonsense of granting more unfair power to doing-everything-for-their-own-growth corporations.
And why don't you use a version control system instead of a set of back up directories?
As usual (after our last incident, I don't know why you are here at all, but up to you), you don't seem to get the idea right. See, when you program in whatever language (compiled/non-compiled, old/new, web/desktop, etc.), you are relying on a root directory where all your files are stored. This is the same when you use an online/offline control system/git whatever; the difference is that, in that case, a set of applications manages that root folder and eventually creates backups/secondary folders, and you have to ultimately trust that application + the machine storing those files. I started my programming career as a simulation engineer (emissions in IC engines) and a big part of that work involved to perform lots simulations (= running software usually taking quite long under different input scenarios); there I got used to this approach of replicating folders for running/developing/analysing not just raw data, but also code (some of the simulations required recompiling some parts). I brought that approach to my software development work and have been evolving it since then, such that it is now extremely reliable, secure and hassle-free.
Logically, I also rely on more standardised approaches/code controls at many different points and for different purposes (e.g., public repositories, projects where I have to use a code control/sharing software, etc.). I don't spend any appreciable amount of time/effort on backuping my code, I have never lost anything of value (that comment about an hour of work was almost a joke) and I am very happy with my current proceeding. In one week of a standard development, I can have around 20 different folders (representing relevant points of that development; note that these are 20 entities that can be managed individually, as opposed to 20 internal differences only recognised by the given control software) in 4-5 different hard-drives, which I can recover and start using almost immediately. You are suggesting me to replace (or plainly criticising it?) that proceeding (which I have been using for over the last 8 years) with a blind trust in a third-party tool (because logically I will not develop a code control software; I did develop all my backup applications though) which will be intrinsically less safe (as commented, just one folder; or perhaps more but managed internally and without me having anything to say there), just because this is what you do (or the only proceeding you can think of?) what makes you think that everyone else should do exactly the same regardless of their conditions, experience, the kind of work they perform and, even much more importantly, what they are feeling like doing? Pfff... Are you seriously still not getting that there is nothing for us to discuss? There are lots of people around, why not trying to talk to someone else?
When coding, I start working on a fresh set of files (make a copy of folder "1", rename to "2" and continue working on it) various times per day (it depends upon the complexity/importance of the development) and automatically duplicate the last set. And, in case of being particularly difficult/important, I store another copy in an external drive. I backup all relevant folders almost daily. Around twice a month, I do an external backup of my whole hard-drive.
Once, I made a mistake while doing the first backups and lost a whole hour of work. It was a horrible experience which I expect to never pass through again... And this guy loses 3 months of work in one click!! H*ly shi*! There aren't enough asterisks in the world to express so much pain. LOL.
This seems one of the most profitable business right now. Actually having/knowing doesn't seem to matter anymore. It is everywhere, much more in internet: fake followers ("I follow you if you follow me back" or paid followers, all the same), friends, references (people recommending technical skills in exchange of getting theirs recommended too or stars/likes), knowledge (trying to emulate/steal what other people did without even understanding what you are doing), ideas (let's repeat 1000 times today's trendy whatever without even knowing what we are talking about), even fake feelings (people passing from extremely sad to extremely happy in minutes; or feeling attacked by non-existent meanings, even just by being proven wrong), etc.
I honestly don't get it: why making any effort to be part of nothing? To be liked by those with so worthless opinions? I prefer to be honest and fair, to have actual knowledge/learn/improve/accept my errors, to trust what is trustworthy and like what is likeable. I am not precisely too young (close to my 40s already!), but am forward-thinking (leftist, in case you are interested), adaptable and innovation-prone; I am not the kind of guy who is always remembering the good old days. But I am not liking at all what I am seeing lately (e.g., internet, software/programming knowledge, extremely stupid investments, Hollywood, generic expectations, etc.): there is a systematic promotion of mediocrity, dishonesty, unfair impositions (trolling, unmotivatedly censoring anyone thinking even slightly differently, ignoring those not blindly accepting whatever half truth), also known as stupidity.
For anyone interested: I prefer to be alone, poor and ignored than participating in that circus of emptiness. I will continue (even more now than before) being completely honest, fair and only showing what I truly have/know; saying "I like" to what I really like while I am liking it; not being afraid of random crazy misinterpretations of each single word I say. I will not tolerate any unjust imposition or any other output of this dictatorship of appearances/ignorance.
Rather than "Weight is another name for force", I should have written "weight is a force (mass * gravity acceleration)".
Kilograms are mass; pounds are weight
This and quite a few comments below are wrong. Both kilograms and pounds measure mass. Weight is another name for force, which is measured in different units in both systems. There are force units which have similar names to their mass counter-parts (e.g., kilogram-force or pound-force). Conventionally, we talk about kilograms/pounds and mass/weight almost interchangeably, but this is technically wrong.
COMPLETELY-MOTIVATED SELF-ADVERTISEMENT: I have developed completely from scratch a quite comprehensive unit-parsing library in C# (converted to Java): UnitParser (first part of FlexibleParser). It is open source and the files dealing with basic unit classifications are quite user-friendly. For example, unit names in C# and Java.
Domain sharks routinely snatch up expired domains, for several reasons: first, to extort money from the previous owner if the expiry was unintentional; second, under the assumption that if someone took the trouble to register it, it has some sort of value and they might make a profit selling it to a third party; and third, to gain ad revenue from any existing links or search results that might point to the expired domain.
First time I hear about these domain sharks! Thanks for the explanations! I am still happy with my decision, but all this sounds pretty problematic. I will certainly think carefully before letting any other domain name expire in the future.
Interesting, thanks. So, by putting together this with the ideas in the post below, I understand that GoDaddy (and perhaps other hosting providers) is some kind of middleman for domain-name speculators (or even perhaps a speculator itself)? Again curious and not too surprising. If there is a market for that, why not?
their speculation is to acquire the name as cheaply as possible. That means not paying you for it.
Are you saying that there are people whose work consists in keeping track of soon-to-expire domain names and, once expired, buying them just in case? It is curious, but not too surprising. Thanks for the info.
I meant "...names being managed?".
:))
(Even though I am no grammar-or-any-other-kind-of nazi, I do recognise that am making many errors here lately. I am not sorry though and do invite anyone not liking what I write to not read it
Does anyone know how are expired domain names being management? I have recently let an old domain name expire. My hosting provider kept it during some days after the expiration, but now it is parked at godaddy.com (not my hosting provider). Has someone already bought that domain name via GoDaddy (?! anyone interested in it should have contacted me before, I guess) or is that a normal proceeding among hosting providers (buying/selling expired domain names)?
'vaccines causing problems as a misconception' doesn't imply that (you believe) vaccines don't cause problems
Perhaps not in general, but within this context should be clear. Saying that vaccines are fine as opposed to anti-vaccine people (who consider the whole vaccination idea bad) should be intuitively understood as good enough, what implies isolated cases being bad also included.
to name calling or insults was a breath of fresh air, and does you credit.
Thanks. Although honestly I don't see how a comment like yours could trigger any kind of insult. Because of your tiny (and completely reasonable) correction to my generic statement "vaccines are fine"? No sensible person should ever react aggressively to such a comment!
I understand that you can find many unmotivatedly-aggressive behaviours online, but perhaps you shouldn't normalise them by assuming that they are acceptable. Unreasonable, fanatic, disproportionately-aggressive, etc. people are all the same; it doesn't matter if they are left-/right-winged, support/attack what might make more/less sense, etc. When you stop trying to adequately understand others, start expecting your position to unilaterally prevail, start attacking anyone thinking differently or similar, you become the same kind of fanatic in my book and you get exactly the same amount of understanding from me (= none).
I meant: "...but wouldn't find any problem to update..."
Are you suggesting, as seems implicit in your statement, that vaccines never cause problems?
No. I will never dare to use a word like never when describing a so wide reality; not even in case of having a deep knowledge about it, what's isn't even the case. My statement isn't implying such a thing, only your (mis)interpretation does. I was merely highlighting what is considered common knowledge in medicine since quite long time ago: vaccines are helpful. In any case, my true intention was to use this specific situation as a mere example to describe certain scenarios, where providing further (presumably sensible and reliable) knowledge doesn't help.
Think carefully, before you answer...
If you are implying that my answer might ironically denote a latent fanaticism, I wouldn’t be afraid of that. I am pretty much the opposite of a fanatic blindly believing in whatever. I am reasonably sure about my ideas on the vaccine front, but would find any problem to update my position in case of being required.