Your goal in University undergrad courses is rarely to produce anything usable. It is instead to understand the subject you are studying and get some practical experience applying that knowledge. Copying here with the aim of avoiding having to understand and avoiding getting practical experience means you never grasp the concepts.
In contrast your job is about producing an end result that will be used. Copying here isn't cheating at all. It's reuse.
In other words in university your goal is to understand quicksort. At work your goal is to use it. Implementing quicksort is perhaps vital to the first and not required for the second.
You have to go out of your way to include location in your pic. You need to be outdoors with most phones to get a clean GPS signal and have the GPS on the phone switched on and the camera set to include GPS data. GPS is still an advanced (and desired!) feature on non-mobile phone cameras that people pay extra money for. It's just that many phones now happen to include both a camera and a GPS so giving the user the option to record the two makes sense. On a decent camera, in all but the top of the line SLRs you still have to get additional hardware to do it.
Pretending this is some sort of major security iisk is asinine.
I'm not saying your usage is erroneous. In some contexts it does make sense. This just isn't one of them. When you use language, you need to be sensitive to context, you can't just blinding plug in whatever definition suits you.
What you did was take a contrary definition and insist that it is the only one that applies. Do you even understand the irony here?
I know many people on slashdot have mistrust for Google becuase the sheer amount of data they possess is a looming liability and their "don't be evil" mantra may not always pan out. One thing I wanted to point out is that Google at least makes an effort and a global effort at that
Please stop drinking the coolaid and smoking fairy dust. Google does whatever is in Google's best interests. If that's playing on the "don't be evil" propaganda, they'll milk it. If not, they'll cite external pressures. To think otherwise is naive.
If you intend to do anything illegal you must register. If you litter and have not registered your intention to litter we're going to come down hard on you! Planning to kill your spouse? Register now, and get 20% off your sentence! Planning to rob a bank? Registration before Feb 15th gives you 10% off your sentence. Planning a terrorist act? Just call 1-900-TERR-RIST, and we'll go easy on you if you don't make it right away to your chosen form of heaven.
Seriously, what kind of bass awkwards government scheme is this? If your penalties for commiting a crime are too lax, tighten them. Otherwise expecting people to register their intention of breaking the law (and inciting the overthrow of the government isn't just simple free speech folks. If you think it is maybe you're so messed up this law will work on you) is pure nonsense.
The muppets coming up with this should be....oh wait I'd have to register to say that....
It does depend on your definition of the word "art" but I'm not the only one who uses the word in the context you describe as erroneous. At best the word art is ambiguous and should be avoided. The word engineering is less ambiguous and more accurate.
What you're arguing against is mocks. In theory what you strive for is fantastic. In practice you don't always get to determine the architecture. You get to choose the best of a bad bunch. Combine this with the thinking in some circles that mocks are the best thing since slice bread, and you can sure end up in a mess. I happen to agree with you in principle: Mocks are wasteful and can be dangerous. In practice, sometimes you have no choice, because setting up with real objects can be too complex or time consuming (or both).
They're not idiots. This is no different to poking someone's eyes out so they're forced to rely on you to be their eyes, and so they can't go anywhere or do anything without you. They're also sending a message that they are in power and can do whatever they like.
I've managed good photos using a point and shoot digicam with it's lens similar in size, using small cheap telescopes. You do need to have manual controls and manual focus on the camera, and have some idea how to use them. You also need to be willing to try different settings and ways of focusing.
- Start with the planets, and bright messier objects (brighter than magnitude 4 to start with). Don't waste too much time on fainter deep sky objects - you need a larger scope (bigger aperture) and/or low light pollution. - Take a look at the zodical constellations and plan ahead to look at what's visible at the time of year your course is on. - Get a planisphere, and a book or two. - Take a look at the free astronomy software out there - especially Cartes Du Ceil/Skycharts, Celestia, Stellarium. There's excellent paid stuff too but start with what's free. - Get in touch with your local astronomy club and talk to them - some of them will have been in it for decades and will intimately know what's viewable from your location for a given time of year. You might even be able to get one to come out for an observing night. - Look up the brightest stars in wikipedia - Find a local professional astronomer and ask if they know of any school programs your school can get involved in. There may be a chance to get the kids to do some real science - Get a hold of a cheap pair of 7x50 binoculars. Binoculars are easier to use than a telescope, can be mounted to a camera tripod if you wish, and easier to learn to use before stepping up to a scope. - Create some basic analogue setting circles for your telescope and learn to align it so you can be sure you know what you're looking at - Make sure your kids know what they're looking at. Kids are use to big visuals and if they don't understand what they're seeing even the most impressive sites like Saturn's rings will be a let down
The web is your friend. Lots out there. Not all related to observing. Google beginner astronomy.
Please overpay more for your home phones, mobile phones and Internet so we can resuming having our annual junkets. You can do this easily by failing to be clairvoyant about your future usage of our products and services. At the boy's club er we mean SUPERCOMM conference we've had disagreements on the detail of the propaganda err we mean exciting information we wish to brainwash you err we mean inform you about. So we have decided to part company - each of us will be having lots separate shows from now on. However more junkets er we mean trade shows means more money is needed, so expect all your charges to go up errr we mean expect new and exciting value added offerings in line with the current environmental conditions.
Signed,
Those turkeys that make moving between handsets or providers a time consuming ordeal from hell....err we mean your friendly phone communications providers.
Now pass the vintage scotch, and call my drug dealer and pimp, I'm having a party tonight!
The only part that is an "art" is working out how to successfully isolate the component that you're trying to test. For simple components at lower layers (typically data CRUD) it's not so hard. Once you find you're having to jump through hoops to set up your stubs, it gets harder to "fake" them successfully and becomes a more error prone and time consuming process. It can also be difficult if there's security in the way. The very checks you've put in to prevent security violations now have to be worked around or bypassed for your unit tests. There's also a danger of becoming too confident in your code because it passes the test when run against stub data. You may find there's a bug specific to the interfaces you've stubbed. (For example a bug in a vendor's database driver, or a bug in your data access framework that doesn't show up against your stub).
All of those distracting side issues and complications aside, we are dealing with fundamental engineering principles. Build a component, test a component. Nothing could be simpler, in principle. So it's disappointing when developers get so caught up in the side issues that they resist unit testing. There does come a point where working around obstacles makes unit testing hard and you have to way benefit against cost and ask yourself how realistic the test is. But you don't go into a project assuming every component is too hard to unit test. That's just lazy and self-defeating. It comes down to the simple fact that many programmers aren't very good at breaking down a problem. In industries where their work was more transparent, they wouldn't last long. In software development where your code is abstract and the fruit of your work takes a long time to get to production, bad developers remain.
Because you miss half the damn inane conversation. If you're going to hide all the updates, and after all people do use those stupid apps, what's the point of being on facebook? Starring at a blank page with almost no content must be just as useless.
I don't use my Gmail account much. If this takes off I won't use it at all. I use Facebook occasionally, especially for playing Lexulous (scrabble clone) with my wife lately. I already find the regular changes to their interface and lack of actual content annoying. I don't need to know what animals in what pretend farm my acquaintances from highschool just "bought" in some pathetic online farming game. That is not the same as staying in touch. It has nothing to do with their real lives. Nor does keeping up with changes to Facebook's rules and interface. So I begrudgingly use one poor excuse for a social networking site. I do not need another 60 clones pretending they're the best thing since sliced bread. Every time I come off Facebook I'm convinced I can feel another part of my intellect melted away (and certainly another part of my life wasted).
How under any circumstances is this legal? It's not national security you're talking about, it's a trade agreement. I'd be thankful I'm not American but unfortunately I'm Australian so with a government that's so I don't feel like I have any right to brag, nor reason to celebrate. What happened to the Western ideals of freedom and democrasy. Seem to have thrown the baby out with the bath water sometime around the start of the war on Terra.
Now that I read more carefully author of referenced article must mean Filemon not Diskmon. Diskmon doesn't tell you what files are open (at least not the version I have). Filemon does.
Suvro Upadhyaya, a Senior Software Engineer at Oracle is a liar and a con man. Quite simple really.
Scrum is the latest in a long line of religions I'm sorry I mean methodologies that claims to achieve the unachievable. I propose a new advanced version of Scrum called Scrotum. It's the same as scrum but Ridiculously Overtly Titsup.
They're excellent for a wide range of things. Filemon (now superceded but still available) is an excellent tool for working out what files a piece of software is opening (eg. if you're trying to find config files). Regmon does something similar for the registry. Process explorer is stellar for getting more detail on a process than task manager will ever give (like where the image is running from and what DLLs it's using). Sysinternals filled a gap in diagnostic software. In a Windows environment they're as basic to me as netstat or ping. (speaking of which check out sysinternals tcpview). Especially good for tracing a user mode process right through. There are a lot of other utils to unlock the power of your Windows environment too.
Two sysinternals that weren't mentioned worth knowing about:
streams - view or remove hidden file streams attached to a file not normally seen in explorer. Especially good for removing that pesky "downloaded files are bad" warning when something is marked as being from the Internet zone.
junction - One of a handful of tools that allows you to create junctions (simliar to but not the same as hard directory links) in Windows XP.
The other non-sys-internals thing that every power user should know about is windbg and the debugging symbols. Indespesible for tracking down the culprit if you get blue screens due to device drivers (though obviously non-developers are not going to be able to do much about fixing the fault apart from downloading a different version or removing the device driver)
GIMP is always compared to photoshop. There are some key features missing in GIMP that do not allow serious artists to move to it from Photoshop. Three of these are adjustment layers (which GEGL is suppose to eventually bring about, but it's been a long wait), proper 16 and 32 bit image editing and LAB and CYMK modes. (GIMP only does RGB). I'm greatful for GIMP and thankful for the developer's efforts but I'd rather they focus on these things than dicking around with windowing. The truth is once you get use to it, GIMP's windowing isn't THAT bad.
Lithium Ion batteries degrade whether used or just stored. Whether it's technically possible or not it must make care manufacturers drool at the thought of cars that only last 3 years.
Can you imagine the possibilities? Unleash this thing at the UN. World War III started on a google phone with the mistranslation: "It was lovely eating your daughter".
Slashdot Mirror
Your goal in University undergrad courses is rarely to produce anything usable. It is instead to understand the subject you are studying and get some practical experience applying that knowledge. Copying here with the aim of avoiding having to understand and avoiding getting practical experience means you never grasp the concepts.
In contrast your job is about producing an end result that will be used. Copying here isn't cheating at all. It's reuse.
In other words in university your goal is to understand quicksort. At work your goal is to use it. Implementing quicksort is perhaps vital to the first and not required for the second.
You have to go out of your way to include location in your pic. You need to be outdoors with most phones to get a clean GPS signal and have the GPS on the phone switched on and the camera set to include GPS data. GPS is still an advanced (and desired!) feature on non-mobile phone cameras that people pay extra money for. It's just that many phones now happen to include both a camera and a GPS so giving the user the option to record the two makes sense. On a decent camera, in all but the top of the line SLRs you still have to get additional hardware to do it.
Pretending this is some sort of major security iisk is asinine.
I'm not saying your usage is erroneous. In some contexts it does make sense. This just isn't one of them. When you use language, you need to be sensitive to context, you can't just blinding plug in whatever definition suits you.
What you did was take a contrary definition and insist that it is the only one that applies. Do you even understand the irony here?
Unless you're in politics, of course.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Score +1: Sarcasm. Bazinga implied.
Yes. Jupiter is bright. What's your point?
I know many people on slashdot have mistrust for Google becuase the sheer amount of data they possess is a looming liability and their "don't be evil" mantra may not always pan out. One thing I wanted to point out is that Google at least makes an effort and a global effort at that
Please stop drinking the coolaid and smoking fairy dust. Google does whatever is in Google's best interests. If that's playing on the "don't be evil" propaganda, they'll milk it. If not, they'll cite external pressures. To think otherwise is naive.
If you intend to do anything illegal you must register. If you litter and have not registered your intention to litter we're going to come down hard on you! Planning to kill your spouse? Register now, and get 20% off your sentence! Planning to rob a bank? Registration before Feb 15th gives you 10% off your sentence. Planning a terrorist act? Just call 1-900-TERR-RIST, and we'll go easy on you if you don't make it right away to your chosen form of heaven.
Seriously, what kind of bass awkwards government scheme is this? If your penalties for commiting a crime are too lax, tighten them. Otherwise expecting people to register their intention of breaking the law (and inciting the overthrow of the government isn't just simple free speech folks. If you think it is maybe you're so messed up this law will work on you) is pure nonsense.
The muppets coming up with this should be....oh wait I'd have to register to say that....
It does depend on your definition of the word "art" but I'm not the only one who uses the word in the context you describe as erroneous. At best the word art is ambiguous and should be avoided. The word engineering is less ambiguous and more accurate.
What you're arguing against is mocks. In theory what you strive for is fantastic. In practice you don't always get to determine the architecture. You get to choose the best of a bad bunch. Combine this with the thinking in some circles that mocks are the best thing since slice bread, and you can sure end up in a mess. I happen to agree with you in principle: Mocks are wasteful and can be dangerous. In practice, sometimes you have no choice, because setting up with real objects can be too complex or time consuming (or both).
My toaster is smarter than some people I know
They're not idiots. This is no different to poking someone's eyes out so they're forced to rely on you to be their eyes, and so they can't go anywhere or do anything without you. They're also sending a message that they are in power and can do whatever they like.
I've managed good photos using a point and shoot digicam with it's lens similar in size, using small cheap telescopes. You do need to have manual controls and manual focus on the camera, and have some idea how to use them. You also need to be willing to try different settings and ways of focusing.
Here's what I did years ago with a 3MP camera, and my first scope which is worse than what you described:
http://www.progsoc.uts.edu.au/~sammy/photography/Moon8567.jpg
http://www.progsoc.uts.edu.au/~sammy/photography/MoonInDaylight.jpg
Here's one of my latest images, through a 10" dobsonian telescope - animated gif comparing to Virtual Moon Atlas:
http://www.progsoc.uts.edu.au/~sammy/photography/IMG_1488_OverlayAnimationSmall.gif
Some suggestions:
- Start with the planets, and bright messier objects (brighter than magnitude 4 to start with). Don't waste too much time on fainter deep sky objects - you need a larger scope (bigger aperture) and/or low light pollution.
- Take a look at the zodical constellations and plan ahead to look at what's visible at the time of year your course is on.
- Get a planisphere, and a book or two.
- Take a look at the free astronomy software out there - especially Cartes Du Ceil/Skycharts, Celestia, Stellarium. There's excellent paid stuff too but start with what's free.
- Get in touch with your local astronomy club and talk to them - some of them will have been in it for decades and will intimately know what's viewable from your location for a given time of year. You might even be able to get one to come out for an observing night.
- Look up the brightest stars in wikipedia
- Find a local professional astronomer and ask if they know of any school programs your school can get involved in. There may be a chance to get the kids to do some real science
- Get a hold of a cheap pair of 7x50 binoculars. Binoculars are easier to use than a telescope, can be mounted to a camera tripod if you wish, and easier to learn to use before stepping up to a scope.
- Create some basic analogue setting circles for your telescope and learn to align it so you can be sure you know what you're looking at
- Make sure your kids know what they're looking at. Kids are use to big visuals and if they don't understand what they're seeing even the most impressive sites like Saturn's rings will be a let down
The web is your friend. Lots out there. Not all related to observing. Google beginner astronomy.
Dear Peasants er we mean customers,
Please overpay more for your home phones, mobile phones and Internet so we can resuming having our annual junkets. You can do this easily by failing to be clairvoyant about your future usage of our products and services. At the boy's club er we mean SUPERCOMM conference we've had disagreements on the detail of the propaganda err we mean exciting information we wish to brainwash you err we mean inform you about. So we have decided to part company - each of us will be having lots separate shows from now on. However more junkets er we mean trade shows means more money is needed, so expect all your charges to go up errr we mean expect new and exciting value added offerings in line with the current environmental conditions.
Signed,
Those turkeys that make moving between handsets or providers a time consuming ordeal from hell....err we mean your friendly phone communications providers.
Now pass the vintage scotch, and call my drug dealer and pimp, I'm having a party tonight!
The only part that is an "art" is working out how to successfully isolate the component that you're trying to test. For simple components at lower layers (typically data CRUD) it's not so hard. Once you find you're having to jump through hoops to set up your stubs, it gets harder to "fake" them successfully and becomes a more error prone and time consuming process. It can also be difficult if there's security in the way. The very checks you've put in to prevent security violations now have to be worked around or bypassed for your unit tests. There's also a danger of becoming too confident in your code because it passes the test when run against stub data. You may find there's a bug specific to the interfaces you've stubbed. (For example a bug in a vendor's database driver, or a bug in your data access framework that doesn't show up against your stub).
All of those distracting side issues and complications aside, we are dealing with fundamental engineering principles. Build a component, test a component. Nothing could be simpler, in principle. So it's disappointing when developers get so caught up in the side issues that they resist unit testing. There does come a point where working around obstacles makes unit testing hard and you have to way benefit against cost and ask yourself how realistic the test is. But you don't go into a project assuming every component is too hard to unit test. That's just lazy and self-defeating. It comes down to the simple fact that many programmers aren't very good at breaking down a problem. In industries where their work was more transparent, they wouldn't last long. In software development where your code is abstract and the fruit of your work takes a long time to get to production, bad developers remain.
Because you miss half the damn inane conversation. If you're going to hide all the updates, and after all people do use those stupid apps, what's the point of being on facebook? Starring at a blank page with almost no content must be just as useless.
I don't use my Gmail account much. If this takes off I won't use it at all. I use Facebook occasionally, especially for playing Lexulous (scrabble clone) with my wife lately. I already find the regular changes to their interface and lack of actual content annoying. I don't need to know what animals in what pretend farm my acquaintances from highschool just "bought" in some pathetic online farming game. That is not the same as staying in touch. It has nothing to do with their real lives. Nor does keeping up with changes to Facebook's rules and interface. So I begrudgingly use one poor excuse for a social networking site. I do not need another 60 clones pretending they're the best thing since sliced bread. Every time I come off Facebook I'm convinced I can feel another part of my intellect melted away (and certainly another part of my life wasted).
How under any circumstances is this legal? It's not national security you're talking about, it's a trade agreement. I'd be thankful I'm not American but unfortunately I'm Australian so with a government that's so I don't feel like I have any right to brag, nor reason to celebrate. What happened to the Western ideals of freedom and democrasy. Seem to have thrown the baby out with the bath water sometime around the start of the war on Terra.
Now that I read more carefully author of referenced article must mean Filemon not Diskmon. Diskmon doesn't tell you what files are open (at least not the version I have). Filemon does.
Suvro Upadhyaya, a Senior Software Engineer at Oracle is a liar and a con man. Quite simple really.
Scrum is the latest in a long line of religions I'm sorry I mean methodologies that claims to achieve the unachievable. I propose a new advanced version of Scrum called Scrotum. It's the same as scrum but Ridiculously Overtly Titsup.
They're excellent for a wide range of things. Filemon (now superceded but still available) is an excellent tool for working out what files a piece of software is opening (eg. if you're trying to find config files). Regmon does something similar for the registry. Process explorer is stellar for getting more detail on a process than task manager will ever give (like where the image is running from and what DLLs it's using). Sysinternals filled a gap in diagnostic software. In a Windows environment they're as basic to me as netstat or ping. (speaking of which check out sysinternals tcpview). Especially good for tracing a user mode process right through. There are a lot of other utils to unlock the power of your Windows environment too.
Two sysinternals that weren't mentioned worth knowing about:
streams - view or remove hidden file streams attached to a file not normally seen in explorer. Especially good for removing that pesky "downloaded files are bad" warning when something is marked as being from the Internet zone.
junction - One of a handful of tools that allows you to create junctions (simliar to but not the same as hard directory links) in Windows XP.
The other non-sys-internals thing that every power user should know about is windbg and the debugging symbols. Indespesible for tracking down the culprit if you get blue screens due to device drivers (though obviously non-developers are not going to be able to do much about fixing the fault apart from downloading a different version or removing the device driver)
GIMP is always compared to photoshop. There are some key features missing in GIMP that do not allow serious artists to move to it from Photoshop. Three of these are adjustment layers (which GEGL is suppose to eventually bring about, but it's been a long wait), proper 16 and 32 bit image editing and LAB and CYMK modes. (GIMP only does RGB). I'm greatful for GIMP and thankful for the developer's efforts but I'd rather they focus on these things than dicking around with windowing. The truth is once you get use to it, GIMP's windowing isn't THAT bad.
, but he is a founder, and that could just be what he's owned for many years (always?).
What ARE you smoking? I'm pretty sure that when he founded the company he didn't put in $175 million of his own money.
Lithium Ion batteries degrade whether used or just stored. Whether it's technically possible or not it must make care manufacturers drool at the thought of cars that only last 3 years.
Can you imagine the possibilities? Unleash this thing at the UN. World War III started on a google phone with the mistranslation: "It was lovely eating your daughter".