That bit about shitty programmers...that's gold. But only a corporation would have to resort to such methods to rein in developers. In Linux land, if you fu is weak then your code goes nowhere (hopefully, at least).
In the case of Linux, you don't have to argue whether unit tests or QA/QC are useless. What matters is simple: what developers want to spend their time contributing. They have historically not done unit tests and the QA/QC is probably as varied as the developer. Linux is a community effort by a self selected community. It's not a corporate driven, profit-seeking entity with a singular management structure.
At first, I think this must make it more robust to long term changes. It raises a follow up question, though. How do those developers/companies group up by contribution? I'm sure most are working on server/enterprise applications, but any changes there might be equally interesting.
For comparison, I found articles citing 1000-2000 developers for Windows 7. I had no luck finding estimates for windows server.
Where Capitalism falls short is if you can't get a job at all or can't start your own business. There is no sympathy for those who can't do well. There is no cushion for rock bottom other than hopefully a supportive family. Fix that while also having people still want to work dirty jobs, and you're on to something.
Sure, that's called socialism.
Ultimately, I think capitalism needs to pragmatically move above its limitations. It generates monopolies -> put pressures into the economy to fight back against them. It devalues people below their basic, human worth -> provide either a basic income or otherwise establish resource allocation outside the capital market. It leaves people unable to afford basic health care -> identify this as a failed market and employ a different allocation system for just basic health care.
That's kinda the thing though isn't it. The current economic situation is that a greater number of people can't make "a bit of money". Many have argued the point of "what's wrong with large wealth inequality?" and this is the answer: it turns public opinion against capitalism. And without popular opinion on your side...you get the guillotine.
Not to mention that the wealth of a nation lies in the general public. If you want a wealthy nation you need to empower individuals over corporations/oligarchs.
And you can get second hand Polycom conference room phones for dirt cheap too if you're on a tight budget. I don't see how/why anyone would authorize an expenditure for this very costly Microsoft product that offers nothing particularly new.
Because, to certain minds, look >> function and look + cost >> function even more
I realize they've probably all got this sort of thing turned off across all of their deployments, but I can't imagine anyone in the industry not taking this as a sign to consider alternatives to MS
I've got a smartphone...sure, it's great. But I can't honestly say that I feel I've gotten the upfront price plus the monthly fee's worth of utility/entertainment out of it.
What's everyone else's experiences with smartphones?
Just using clues like the names of the sellers and what other items they tended to sell, participants correctly guessed the gender of 56%, declared 35% unguessable, and got less than 9% wrong. So gender can come through if buyers are paying attention.
Ok, read up on what you pointed out. 56% of the time is hardly enough to say "oh yeah they can definitely tell"
Slashdot Mirror
They could do both..keep the Air line for the super thin/long battery time users and beef up the Pro line...like those lines ought to be already.
I really doubt this problem would last after all human drivers are replaced.
The way to improve computational technology is parallelism. What are the usage domains?
-anything video related
--games
--image recognition
-anything AI (I think?)
--autonomous cars
--facial recognition
-a lot of physics applications
Thoughts?
I think there's a clause somewhere saying for the contract of transaction to be valid at least 0.01 has to be exchanged (or is it $1?).
Use one as a guest user. Suddenly it doesn't matter what you do on that pc (save network activity)
It's not safe where I live either. You would be biking in well north of 100f, highly polluted air, and traffic that WANTS to kill you.
My take away was that I don't like cities
That bit about shitty programmers...that's gold. But only a corporation would have to resort to such methods to rein in developers. In Linux land, if you fu is weak then your code goes nowhere (hopefully, at least).
Would you like a chair to throw, Balmer?
In the case of Linux, you don't have to argue whether unit tests or QA/QC are useless. What matters is simple: what developers want to spend their time contributing. They have historically not done unit tests and the QA/QC is probably as varied as the developer. Linux is a community effort by a self selected community. It's not a corporate driven, profit-seeking entity with a singular management structure.
At first, I think this must make it more robust to long term changes. It raises a follow up question, though. How do those developers/companies group up by contribution? I'm sure most are working on server/enterprise applications, but any changes there might be equally interesting.
For comparison, I found articles citing 1000-2000 developers for Windows 7. I had no luck finding estimates for windows server.
Where Capitalism falls short is if you can't get a job at all or can't start your own business. There is no sympathy for those who can't do well. There is no cushion for rock bottom other than hopefully a supportive family. Fix that while also having people still want to work dirty jobs, and you're on to something.
Sure, that's called socialism.
Ultimately, I think capitalism needs to pragmatically move above its limitations. It generates monopolies -> put pressures into the economy to fight back against them. It devalues people below their basic, human worth -> provide either a basic income or otherwise establish resource allocation outside the capital market. It leaves people unable to afford basic health care -> identify this as a failed market and employ a different allocation system for just basic health care.
That's kinda the thing though isn't it. The current economic situation is that a greater number of people can't make "a bit of money". Many have argued the point of "what's wrong with large wealth inequality?" and this is the answer: it turns public opinion against capitalism. And without popular opinion on your side...you get the guillotine.
Not to mention that the wealth of a nation lies in the general public. If you want a wealthy nation you need to empower individuals over corporations/oligarchs.
I doubt that would work but I wish it would
Exactly. It's asking too much for an incremental advancement. For that matter, I can't imagine a court taking siri results up as a lawsuit
And you can get second hand Polycom conference room phones for dirt cheap too if you're on a tight budget. I don't see how/why anyone would authorize an expenditure for this very costly Microsoft product that offers nothing particularly new.
Because, to certain minds, look >> function and look + cost >> function even more
I read it like "what could we expect terrorists to figure out"
I realize they've probably all got this sort of thing turned off across all of their deployments, but I can't imagine anyone in the industry not taking this as a sign to consider alternatives to MS
Very good point! Wages have definitely been low, stayed low, and probably decreased relative to actual cost of living.
I've got a smartphone...sure, it's great. But I can't honestly say that I feel I've gotten the upfront price plus the monthly fee's worth of utility/entertainment out of it.
What's everyone else's experiences with smartphones?
It's not a strong enough signal for the rest of their analysis...
Just using clues like the names of the sellers and what other items they tended to sell, participants correctly guessed the gender of 56%, declared 35% unguessable, and got less than 9% wrong. So gender can come through if buyers are paying attention.
Ok, read up on what you pointed out. 56% of the time is hardly enough to say "oh yeah they can definitely tell"
For one, how do you know the sex of an ebay seller?
For two, are we sure it's a significant difference?
It's pretty clearly just a marketing strategy if they're not giving teams access to their tools and their reports.
It's going to be hard. They're going to have to tie a lot of desire to survive and knowledge in with a general lack of need for other human contact.