What kinds of devices have we been interacting with for centuries?
Well, sticks and rocks, which can be used as devices. Simple machines (at least since the Grecian days). Also books (primitive information transmission devices, soon to be rendered obsolete). Clocks, microscopes, telescopes... And the list goes on. Many "devices" have been known for quite a while, even if they don't (necessarily) have digital interfaces...
Because the shortage of skilled coders the corporations whine about will certainly be ended if we train even more! It's not like there is anyone out there that knows how to write software that's unemployed, is it?
Wow! I have few enough seconds waiting for me in the future without wasting them reviewing my past. Frankly, I'm going to enjoy the moments I have waiting for me, not the dusty days gone by.
Focus on the now. Forget the past - it's gone and there's nothing you can do to actually relive it; don't worry about the future - it will be here in a minute, anyway.
Who the fuck ever thought it was a good idea to equip every desk in a cube farm with a fucking SPEAKER PHONE?
No need to shout but, if we didn't put them there, the only other place would have been on a table in the middle of every team's space. Although I'm sure that would have worked just as nicely. It might also save us a bit on phones. Thanks for the suggestion!
Zendesk should be facing a hefty fine for its negligence in this case.
And the companies who hired Zendesk should have to pay at least as much for not doing due diligence on their security before hiring them and subjecting their customers to the same.
In order to avoid expensive litigation and settlements in a number of states, it's a very good idea to have enumerable reasons and missed requirements for not hiring someone.
You know, I think that sometimes engineers and their managers are far too worried about legal challenges to hiring decisions. I've been in this business for thirty-five years and have been associated with hiring situations all along the way and have never seen a candidate try to sue a company for not offering an interview or job. This is across about ten companies in two states (granted, neither of these were New York or California, although a few of the companies were headquartered in the latter). I just think that most of people crying about "lawsuits" are spouting crap and are simply scared without reason, based on urban legend.
Show me the statistics. And show me that a simple pass over the resumes of the few who might bring suit, should someone choose to sue, doesn't show enough issues to give a defensible case.
That being said, if you get a valid resume and you're playing the "I want to hire an H1-B" game, then you deserve to be sued - you are breaking the law, after all.
It's nice an author's bio is right there in the article object, but when it's time to update the bio, that does mean going through and touching every article by that author?
Actually, you don't update the biographical information for an article. The biographical information in the article is supposed to reflect the biographical information for the author at the time at which the article is published. When you update the biographical information, it goes into any articles published after the bio is updated. Unless, of course, you want to have a completely different paradigm of publishing than that established in the days of hard copy (which may be a good thing, but is not what is done now). In fact, previous employers for the author may get quite irate that research funded and published by their institution no longer mentions the same because the author has moved on.
No, it's not as simple as it looks. Thanks for asking...
If they are going to refuse my efforts to make their system work for me, I should have an automatic penalty free exit opportunity from any/all contracts.
Sucks to be you, doesn't it?
Welcome to USA (Our Democratic Paradise (TM)) where the phrase "We work hard at screwing you!" is more than a motto! - It's the watchword and operative 24/7, baby! Good thing that our Libertarian paradise is only an election away - then you won't have the government backing up the corporate fascists. Instead, you'll just have the corporate fascists on your back. Good times!
When (almost) all the jobs are automated away, what kind of economy are we left with?
Most people will live drab, awful lives in subsistence-level environments. If they're lucky, maybe drugs will be legalized to allow them to not notice as much and let addiction kill them early. A small group of people will run the proles' lives and have all of the fun associated with using other beings as pawns - increase the chocolate ration one day, cut bread rations the next. Why? Because they can. What else did you expect?
It's not at all uncommon for a senior manager or director at Apple to put in 60-hour weeks.
Nor, from what I hear, is it uncommon for an engineer at Apple to do the same. Yet the pay is quite incommensurate. Making comments like "the bosses work so much harder" is really pretty effing stupid. The reason they're paid more is because (supposedly) their work has more value, not because they're working more hours. Plus, once you get into a subjective measure like "value of work", the metric has lost all comparative value. As such, it's really hard to say that the CEO's salaries are "fair" because they "work harder".
I think the issue is when you feel that you deserve to work a couple hours a day (or week) and get paid more than other people who work for 10s of hours a week (or day) and be paid the same amount.
And, if you work about 1.5x the time and make 300x the salary? This describes the modern CEO.
... they could have trained someone who would be able to succeed in the modern world.
Or at least not screw it up as much (though I don't know why Frank Lloyd Wright is on that list of fuckups, unless you hate his proto-modern architectural style).
OK, tell me what new languages are more than different syntax on the same old constructs? I see procedural, OO (class-based and/or prototypical, with and without multiple inheritance), set/array based (APL and descendants, SQL), logic (out of favor right now), functional, and macro. That's it. And those were explored thirty years ago. Everything else is library and syntax. BFD.
New paradigms? Well, you have web and virtual cloud. One's a boiled over client-server architecture, the other's been done since OS/360.
New hardware? Well, if you've seen one assembler, you've seen them all. Some hardware has additional SIMD functionality (video cards, high-end bespoke processors), and you can make a Beowulf cluster but, other than that, there's nothing that wasn't there (again) thirty years ago.
The real question is why computer science research has stagnated for the past thirty years, and why companies don't see that people who have been around for the past thirty years can pick up any of these things in about three days (having seen all of this crap for 30+ years).
In the end, the only answer is that it's all cost. And then people wonder why no one wants to go into software.
I believe that my own writing was better in high school and early college than it is now.
Mine sure isn't. My writing currently has been honed by literally decades of practice (mainly online posts and email, but a few papers thrown in here and there), massive amounts of rewriting, and ongoing reading and research in effective communications. I also have a larger store of experience to help me construct metaphors and analogies, not to mention helpful tools such as grammar and spelling checkers. I can say that I write much more concisely and entertainingly than I did in my younger years.
Whenever I stumble across one of my old essays I am amazed.
So am I, but probably not in the same way you are...
It lures them in with popcorn, a known gateway food, and pretty soon you're hooked on Junior Mints. From there, it's just a short step to eating movie theater hot dogs and then your doom is assured.
Oh yeah. Sorry. The Republicans in the Senate are just as bad (if not worse), using the filibuster to block anything worthwhile. Again, my apologies for not remembering them as well.
We can hope for a future of working machines and humans enjoying themselves. The other option will be cheap-ass humans with no way of earning a living whatsoever.
Call me a pessimist, but I'd bet on the second happening before the first.
Slashdot Mirror
Is there a difference?
Yeah! One's an amoral whore hired by you to effectively destroy a person's life. The other is the hit man.
What kinds of devices have we been interacting with for centuries?
Well, sticks and rocks, which can be used as devices. Simple machines (at least since the Grecian days). Also books (primitive information transmission devices, soon to be rendered obsolete). Clocks, microscopes, telescopes... And the list goes on. Many "devices" have been known for quite a while, even if they don't (necessarily) have digital interfaces...
Because the shortage of skilled coders the corporations whine about will certainly be ended if we train even more! It's not like there is anyone out there that knows how to write software that's unemployed, is it?
Wow! I have few enough seconds waiting for me in the future without wasting them reviewing my past. Frankly, I'm going to enjoy the moments I have waiting for me, not the dusty days gone by.
Focus on the now. Forget the past - it's gone and there's nothing you can do to actually relive it; don't worry about the future - it will be here in a minute, anyway.
Who the fuck ever thought it was a good idea to equip every desk in a cube farm with a fucking SPEAKER PHONE?
No need to shout but, if we didn't put them there, the only other place would have been on a table in the middle of every team's space. Although I'm sure that would have worked just as nicely. It might also save us a bit on phones. Thanks for the suggestion!
A record company that underpays the musician who writes and records a song expects to get paid and paid and paid and paid and paid once again.
FTFY.
Parent is spewing same gibberish that content of post references, citing NO sources in the process.
Oh, quit whining, Mr. Covey. Your day's finished. Get over it...
...you can't make a Hollywood blockbuster in New Zealand.
Well, you can't make a good one. Peter Jackson proved that.
Zendesk should be facing a hefty fine for its negligence in this case.
And the companies who hired Zendesk should have to pay at least as much for not doing due diligence on their security before hiring them and subjecting their customers to the same.
And we need a Hahvahd degree for Maintenance.
In order to avoid expensive litigation and settlements in a number of states, it's a very good idea to have enumerable reasons and missed requirements for not hiring someone.
You know, I think that sometimes engineers and their managers are far too worried about legal challenges to hiring decisions. I've been in this business for thirty-five years and have been associated with hiring situations all along the way and have never seen a candidate try to sue a company for not offering an interview or job. This is across about ten companies in two states (granted, neither of these were New York or California, although a few of the companies were headquartered in the latter). I just think that most of people crying about "lawsuits" are spouting crap and are simply scared without reason, based on urban legend.
Show me the statistics. And show me that a simple pass over the resumes of the few who might bring suit, should someone choose to sue, doesn't show enough issues to give a defensible case.
That being said, if you get a valid resume and you're playing the "I want to hire an H1-B" game, then you deserve to be sued - you are breaking the law, after all.
Yeah. He was probably married...
Maybe for "best sellers", but I recently saw an Amazon eBook priced higher than the dead tree paperback version. WTF? Note: I did not buy it.
It's nice an author's bio is right there in the article object, but when it's time to update the bio, that does mean going through and touching every article by that author?
Actually, you don't update the biographical information for an article. The biographical information in the article is supposed to reflect the biographical information for the author at the time at which the article is published. When you update the biographical information, it goes into any articles published after the bio is updated. Unless, of course, you want to have a completely different paradigm of publishing than that established in the days of hard copy (which may be a good thing, but is not what is done now). In fact, previous employers for the author may get quite irate that research funded and published by their institution no longer mentions the same because the author has moved on.
No, it's not as simple as it looks. Thanks for asking...
If they are going to refuse my efforts to make their system work for me, I should have an automatic penalty free exit opportunity from any/all contracts.
Sucks to be you, doesn't it?
Welcome to USA (Our Democratic Paradise (TM)) where the phrase "We work hard at screwing you!" is more than a motto! - It's the watchword and operative 24/7, baby! Good thing that our Libertarian paradise is only an election away - then you won't have the government backing up the corporate fascists. Instead, you'll just have the corporate fascists on your back. Good times!
When (almost) all the jobs are automated away, what kind of economy are we left with?
Most people will live drab, awful lives in subsistence-level environments. If they're lucky, maybe drugs will be legalized to allow them to not notice as much and let addiction kill them early. A small group of people will run the proles' lives and have all of the fun associated with using other beings as pawns - increase the chocolate ration one day, cut bread rations the next. Why? Because they can. What else did you expect?
It's not at all uncommon for a senior manager or director at Apple to put in 60-hour weeks.
Nor, from what I hear, is it uncommon for an engineer at Apple to do the same. Yet the pay is quite incommensurate. Making comments like "the bosses work so much harder" is really pretty effing stupid. The reason they're paid more is because (supposedly) their work has more value, not because they're working more hours. Plus, once you get into a subjective measure like "value of work", the metric has lost all comparative value. As such, it's really hard to say that the CEO's salaries are "fair" because they "work harder".
I think the issue is when you feel that you deserve to work a couple hours a day (or week) and get paid more than other people who work for 10s of hours a week (or day) and be paid the same amount.
And, if you work about 1.5x the time and make 300x the salary? This describes the modern CEO.
I think the truth lies somewhere in between.
... they could have trained someone who would be able to succeed in the modern world.
Or at least not screw it up as much (though I don't know why Frank Lloyd Wright is on that list of fuckups, unless you hate his proto-modern architectural style).
New languages, new paradigms, new hardware.
OK, tell me what new languages are more than different syntax on the same old constructs? I see procedural, OO (class-based and/or prototypical, with and without multiple inheritance), set/array based (APL and descendants, SQL), logic (out of favor right now), functional, and macro. That's it. And those were explored thirty years ago. Everything else is library and syntax. BFD.
New paradigms? Well, you have web and virtual cloud. One's a boiled over client-server architecture, the other's been done since OS/360.
New hardware? Well, if you've seen one assembler, you've seen them all. Some hardware has additional SIMD functionality (video cards, high-end bespoke processors), and you can make a Beowulf cluster but, other than that, there's nothing that wasn't there (again) thirty years ago.
The real question is why computer science research has stagnated for the past thirty years, and why companies don't see that people who have been around for the past thirty years can pick up any of these things in about three days (having seen all of this crap for 30+ years).
In the end, the only answer is that it's all cost. And then people wonder why no one wants to go into software.
I believe that my own writing was better in high school and early college than it is now.
Mine sure isn't. My writing currently has been honed by literally decades of practice (mainly online posts and email, but a few papers thrown in here and there), massive amounts of rewriting, and ongoing reading and research in effective communications. I also have a larger store of experience to help me construct metaphors and analogies, not to mention helpful tools such as grammar and spelling checkers. I can say that I write much more concisely and entertainingly than I did in my younger years.
Whenever I stumble across one of my old essays I am amazed.
So am I, but probably not in the same way you are...
"Let's eat Grandma" is not the same as "let's eat, Grandma"
It is if you're adrift on a lifeboat with her. Or on the Donner party (which was more an expedition than a party, but there you have it...).
How exactly do movies affect people?
It lures them in with popcorn, a known gateway food, and pretty soon you're hooked on Junior Mints. From there, it's just a short step to eating movie theater hot dogs and then your doom is assured.
The house? They're the only ones with blame here?
Oh yeah. Sorry. The Republicans in the Senate are just as bad (if not worse), using the filibuster to block anything worthwhile. Again, my apologies for not remembering them as well.
We can hope for a future of working machines and humans enjoying themselves. The other option will be cheap-ass humans with no way of earning a living whatsoever.
Call me a pessimist, but I'd bet on the second happening before the first.