The very last part there is the kicker, IMO. This goes for all conspiracy theories in particular, and a good way for most religions as well: The primary purpose is to aggrandize the believer. The more a faith delivers on that count, the more it appeals to people with a really strong need for that - whether it stems from pathological ego or just a sense of being marginalized, justified or not.
Not Agile. SCRUM is waterfall wrapped in BS. More specifically, it was designed as a way to sneak agile practices into a waterfall-organisation resistant to change, so it tries to provide at least some of what that environment demands with as low a cost as possible. It is debatable whether it achieves this.
Agile doesn't have to be scrum. Adopting the ceremonies of Scrum does not make you agile. If your organisation already understands agility, you don't need Scrum.
Agile is just a set of values, many of them really really important IMO. Some of them seem like common sense now, but you have to see them in the light of the bloated old proceses they rebelled against.
The core philosophy stands up just fine and will continue to do so: - Deliver value early and frequently. This reduces risk, maximises payoff, maximises learning, and keeps you nimble for when you need it. - Accept uncertainty, and handle it by making sure you can adapt quickly, not by excessive up-front planning which doesn't work anyway. Sometimes you need ballistic calculations to arrive at where you want, but most of the time a steering wheel will do the job cheaper, quicker AND better.
Standup metteings have nothing to do with anything. They are just a quick band-aid if you have a culture problem with status meetings dragging out or carrying too much overhead. They can indeed be a better quick-fix for that than just nagging (whether you're trying to be agile or not), but you should probably also be looking at whether the meeting needs to be so frequent, if everyone needs to be there, if the meeting is needed at all, and whether other information flows bothering fewer people would be a better tool.
...the trolls will have found some very creative ways to make this about the threats from feminist, liberals and BigScience(tm). They must be listening to some extremely happy music.
Slashdot needs to add clear trigger warnings to articles so that the broflakes can avoid material that will upset them. Which is pretty much everything. There, saved you a fair few bucks in implementation cost.
This is a common way of expressing "can work for at least four years" in academia.
The problem with former is that is can be read as "works no longer than 4 years" The problem with the latter is that is that is sounds hypothetical, leaving doubt about whether these durations have actually been observed.
The ambiguity could be removed by expanding it into what the original is (fairly established) shorthand for: "has been observed to work for up to four years"
Right. A private company saying "if you want to incite violence and murder you will have to do it without our help" is far worse than... well anything, really?
The actual goods and services consumed by pensioners will still be produced by the contemporary work force. The funding is just bookkeeping. If the number of consumers vs producers are too far off then at least one of the sides will suffer, no matter how you stack it.
Unless productivity per man-hour suddenly shoots up. It just might, but that's a pretty scary bet.
There is also a downside to a savings-heavy approach: a greater portion of the economy is owned and governed according to the interest of pensioners, at the expense of the rest of society. Might not always be what you want.
But it's funny you mention Sweden - the Nordic countries are an interesting contrast to Japan: There it is common for women to have both children and a career, thanks to generous maternity and paternity leaves, and comprehensive subsidized daycare. The birth rate is still a bit shy of balanced, but they are nowhere near heading for the scale of problems that Japan or even Italy are facing. Does require quite a fair bit of taxing, though.
Getting rid of garbage collection? The feature whose whole point is boosting productivity at the cost of performance? In a setting where performance is explicitly not and productivity explicitly is? Can you spell "hangup"?
Sierra Online took it a step further in the AGI engine and invented an early precursor of the scene-bumpmap which allowed their pseudo-3D adventure games to work by using a map-image where depth was indicated by color allowing characters to walk in front or behind objects
The word you are looking for is "depth buffer" or "Z-buffer", and is fairly unrelated to bumpmaps. It was a well established concept in computer graphics even before the PC had any graphics at all, and was certainly not invented by Sierra. I guess they pioneered it in PC games, but I doubt they were first. It is still a key technique in raster-based 3D rendering, hard at work in all modern graphics cards.
Slashdot Mirror
stupidly impossible
When did that ever stop conspiracy theorists?
The supposed moon landing cover up would have been much more expensive than just going...
Easy. "They" just fly slower on some routes to prop up the hoax.
The very last part there is the kicker, IMO.
This goes for all conspiracy theories in particular, and a good way for most religions as well:
The primary purpose is to aggrandize the believer.
The more a faith delivers on that count, the more it appeals to people with a really strong need for that - whether it stems from pathological ego or just a sense of being marginalized, justified or not.
Not Agile. SCRUM is waterfall wrapped in BS.
More specifically, it was designed as a way to sneak agile practices into a waterfall-organisation resistant to change, so it tries to provide at least some of what that environment demands with as low a cost as possible. It is debatable whether it achieves this.
Agile doesn't have to be scrum.
Adopting the ceremonies of Scrum does not make you agile.
If your organisation already understands agility, you don't need Scrum.
Agile is just a set of values, many of them really really important IMO.
Some of them seem like common sense now, but you have to see them in the light of the bloated old proceses they rebelled against.
The core philosophy stands up just fine and will continue to do so:
- Deliver value early and frequently. This reduces risk, maximises payoff, maximises learning, and keeps you nimble for when you need it.
- Accept uncertainty, and handle it by making sure you can adapt quickly, not by excessive up-front planning which doesn't work anyway. Sometimes you need ballistic calculations to arrive at where you want, but most of the time a steering wheel will do the job cheaper, quicker AND better.
Standup metteings have nothing to do with anything.
They are just a quick band-aid if you have a culture problem with status meetings dragging out or carrying too much overhead. They can indeed be a better quick-fix for that than just nagging (whether you're trying to be agile or not), but you should probably also be looking at whether the meeting needs to be so frequent, if everyone needs to be there, if the meeting is needed at all, and whether other information flows bothering fewer people would be a better tool.
That doesn't require more resolution.
You need to add in all the other people in the hotel that would get hit.
Stop telling me what to do.
...the trolls will have found some very creative ways to make this about the threats from feminist, liberals and BigScience(tm).
They must be listening to some extremely happy music.
Slashdot needs to add clear trigger warnings to articles so that the broflakes can avoid material that will upset them. Which is pretty much everything. There, saved you a fair few bucks in implementation cost.
First they came for the peanut allergy...
Who isn't?
My country is more liberal than yours. I see nothing like that here. I blame your flag. Just as well-founded.
Yes, it just you who thinks this is what happened.
This is a common way of expressing "can work for at least four years" in academia.
The problem with former is that is can be read as "works no longer than 4 years"
The problem with the latter is that is that is sounds hypothetical, leaving doubt about whether these durations have actually been observed.
The ambiguity could be removed by expanding it into what the original is (fairly established) shorthand for: "has been observed to work for up to four years"
"far worse"
Right. A private company saying "if you want to incite violence and murder you will have to do it without our help" is far worse than... well anything, really?
Idiot.
Insightful my ass.
Funny how I completely missed the collapse of the Scandinavian countries while living there. Not much of a facts person, are you?
Now we only need to try it out on modern humans.
The actual goods and services consumed by pensioners will still be produced by the contemporary work force. The funding is just bookkeeping. If the number of consumers vs producers are too far off then at least one of the sides will suffer, no matter how you stack it.
Unless productivity per man-hour suddenly shoots up. It just might, but that's a pretty scary bet.
There is also a downside to a savings-heavy approach: a greater portion of the economy is owned and governed according to the interest of pensioners, at the expense of the rest of society. Might not always be what you want.
But it's funny you mention Sweden - the Nordic countries are an interesting contrast to Japan: There it is common for women to have both children and a career, thanks to generous maternity and paternity leaves, and comprehensive subsidized daycare. The birth rate is still a bit shy of balanced, but they are nowhere near heading for the scale of problems that Japan or even Italy are facing. Does require quite a fair bit of taxing, though.
I don't think you'll find too many serious biologists who believe in unguided evolution
That depends on your taste.
I'm guessing that you would find "close to all of them" to be too many for your liking.
In that case you are wrong.
Just like I told my insurance company: Oh, you say my house is gonna burn, do you? Prove it! Greedy fuckers.
Sloot's death was an inside job!
All heart attacks are.
Getting rid of garbage collection? The feature whose whole point is boosting productivity at the cost of performance? In a setting where performance is explicitly not and productivity explicitly is? Can you spell "hangup"?
Do your own homework.
The creature, sometimes referred to as a "mammophant,"
Way to waste an opportunity.
"Heffalump" FTW!
Sierra Online took it a step further in the AGI engine and invented an early precursor of the scene-bumpmap which allowed their pseudo-3D adventure games to work by using a map-image where depth was indicated by color allowing characters to walk in front or behind objects
The word you are looking for is "depth buffer" or "Z-buffer", and is fairly unrelated to bumpmaps.
It was a well established concept in computer graphics even before the PC had any graphics at all, and was certainly not invented by Sierra. I guess they pioneered it in PC games, but I doubt they were first.
It is still a key technique in raster-based 3D rendering, hard at work in all modern graphics cards.