No, you can not retroactively "drop" the GPLv2. Of course you are free to stop distributing the program/binaries AND source code at any time you want, remove all the GPLv2 bits, recompile it (if there has been no contribution from other people, or the other people consent!) and distribute it as a non-free software. But:
1. this is not retroactively. All old spin-offs, copies, installations, source code instances keep free
2. there likely will be copies, it will hit slashdot, you get a Streisand effect, and it will be hosted in the old GPL version - TEN times. At least.;)
This whole "oh my god he sells GPL'd software" is stupid and but-ugly. To pick up Linus' talking style. I like free software, but I also like it that people MIGHT try to earn money with it. If it fails as a business modell, because the don't put in any additional value, that's their problem, not mine.
All I need is the release of modified source code. If I want to rebuild and redistribute that program, I could.
Oh, btw: it would be VERY funny if some people actually having a Apple Developer iPhone Account would download and redistribute the program, say, for something between $0 and $2.99. Just to kill of this marketing farce.
... should have READ the GPL in the first place. It's absolutely fine to charge for packaging/compiling/etc.
Of course you have to release the new source code under the GPL, and anyone might, after that, recompile it, and sell it for $0 - if he wants to.
Basically, that's exactly the same what Novell, RedHat,... do. Just with one program, not with thousands. But it remains the same thing. And I - as a 'GPL2-developer' myself - also don't see any ethical problems. Of course, there are some legal tidbits about the "how to install it without a developers licence" - but that's similar to i.e. any program based upon a proprietary language/toolkit/... - and you actually CAN compile and install the program, given that you are a registered apple iPhone developer. That's not much different than buying M$ Visual Studio 2009 Professional (~$800).
I think those people who say otherwise
a) don't like Apple in general - and from a free software perspective there ARE things that are not nice in Cupertino, it is impossible to deny that
b) might feel betrayed by anyone who sells GPL software in any way, because the STILL did not get the "not free as in beer"-concept. Which is basically a shame.
The.net-Update has "installed" this Add-On secretly for a few months now, as far as I know. It just got into the "normal" Windows auto-update stream, thus annoying more and more people? Or am I somehow mistaken?
... topless at the beach and send it via eMail to her friends, she might go to jail.
If some asshole school teachers strip search her because of false accusation of another student (which in itself would be enough of a scandal), everything is just "fine"?
If that's the current state of the US of A's legislation, you are very much more f*cked than the europeans. And I thought we are bad off with all that internet censorship....
PS: sorry, I forgot. Topless at the beach, 13yo... don't think that would happen on a US beach, would it? Anyway.
She should do what she likes, nothing else. If she talented and open-minded, she should be able to choose for herself - nothing to achieve by "useful suggestions".
Forcing someone into science just because she has talent to handle numbers is just stupid. I know very capable people who did what they like, which wasn't at all what their "feats" would have suggested, and they feel very lucky. On the other hand I also know students who had to fight for every exam, every grade, because the where not that talented or gifted or whatever - but they did it, because it was what they wanted to do - and they achieved what they wanted to do. And they are lucky.
And there are those gifted who rushed through academic career, but simply don't like what they do now for a living at all. They are those who are unlucky.
What counts, after all? Luck, or money? I choose luck - it seems, natural, somehow.
I was somehow "OK" for the NDA on the devkit, but this is simply so annoying and stupid that I really don't know what to say about it.
Or, maybe, apple really fucked this one up.
Even if most people might say different, application development for MacOS is really a great experience, and all tools come for free with MacOS X - even pretty advanced stuff like distributed compiling (of course based upon distcc, so OSS again). It's just great fun, and the Core framework is really, really great.
But what they are doing with the iphone now... I don't get it. They don't expect that this is stopping bad press, do they?
maybe you could simply push the pictures to a lot of sites, if possible even archive.org, and just include some weblinks.
I'd say as the net does not forget very well, you might have a good chance that the pictures will still exist in 25 years...;)
Otherwise, include multiple media. USB drives (nice standard, pretty ubiquitous, should not go away THAT fast), CD-ROM, DVD, maybe a digital picture frame (why not!) with SD-Card media.
That should cover up 25 years easily. I boot my Linux TV/Video- system (otherwise HD-less, netboot via nfs) of a 5 1/4"-drive that I ripped out of a late 1980s PC. That's pretty close to 25 years ago.
FF2 had a warning message about self-signed certificates, too. The problem in my opinion is the way it is presented, and how the "exception" thing is handled from a user perspective.
In FF2, you simply had to accept the certificate, and "go" for it. So far so good. Warning message, "OK, I know what I'm doing".
Downside: anyone just klicks "yes" in ANY message, so where's the security in that?
Anyway, with the new scheme, it's simply annoying, even if you know what you are doing. I.e. I need to use some development installations of software for testing purposes, and of course, whe have to test the ssl-encrypted parts, too. Buying certificates for all this development setups would be stupid (like, throwing the money out of the window).
Why do I have to click FOUR times to simply say "this site is OK for me", while I only have to click once for popups, for auto-fillin for login data, and so on?
Just one simple "add an exception" that does the trick WITHOUT forcing me to:
- *manually* (!!!) FETCH and DISPLAY the certificate before I can accept it (hell, I KNOW it's valid, I generated it myself! And a "normal user" can't understand ANYTHING in the certificate details, so what's the point? And no, they won't "learn", either!) - yes, I'm sure, I want an exception - yes, for real, I...
... this announcement, making a clear statement that this is NOT Duke Nukem Forever?
Sorry for shouting, but this is really a complete mess... it might even lead to nervous breakdowns, common outrages, mass panic etc.pp. - not to mention camping havoc before retail stores...
When I got in touch with a wii for the first time - a friend of mine bought one - he bought Redsteel. I think it was released directly after the Wii.
It's no more or less than a typical ego shooter. "Spoil" the Wii? Yeah, sure.
Advice: Open your eyes. Just have ONE short look upon your own kid's desktop, dear people-who-want-to-prohibit-violance-in-video-games. I'd be suprised if no shooter is to be found there.
For some small sites, we need to encrypt traffic to protect consumer data from being "spyed on" by misconfigured switches, WLAN eavesdropping, and so on.
For those sites, buying a certificate is possible, but the costs are high compared to the gains (as this is *only* about protection of the data, not about "being sure this is site XY). Based on the certificate IDs/hash it's possible in this environment for anyone to compare whether the certificate is a trustworthy one, or not. The certificate identification is, in this case, possible.
But it's a lot harder to explain why this really, really scary message (it scares the HELL out of customers) appears now and then, when someone moved to a new computer or something.
The old FF2 behaviour was "better" in this respect.
I also see benefits of the efforts made to clarify this encryption/identification stuff for normal users, like the green address bar. That's really a gift, showing the user "everything all-right with your banking application or amazon store".
But this behaviour marking "self-signed" certificates as something über-evil out of the deepest depth of hell, is crossing a line a bit to far, in my opinion.
A short warning with a better explanation, or even a yellow bar - encrypted, but not "that secure" - might have been a better way.
Well, patches welcome, I hope:)
Still better than just praying the 2012-expected Internet Nightmare 9 misteriously replacing the old behaviour with something worse. You know what I'm talking about, are you?;)
Bike. Don't do it at home, get some sunlight/fresh air. You won't crumble to dust.
I don't do it on a very regular base, just about once a week, but if you get to something like 30km twice a week, you'll gain a lot of stamina, and of course loose some weight.
I like biking (fresh air, not some nonesense machine in the basement) because
- you can do it on your own - it's really simpel, you don't even have to do a lot of warm-up - just start slowly - it's fairly easy to keep the strain at good levels for your training, pulse between 130 and 140 and stuff - you almost never will have any problems with muscle ache the next day, even if you drove a longer distance
Of course, this is not an option if you live in central New York, because of, well less fresh air and no really nice riding places?
Damn, now this is messy. I just *HAVE* to play myth again, thanks for the tag. Additionally, I just noticed I missed realMyth. What a shame, it looks pretty nice - and fun.
But: where to get it? It's more than sold out, nothing on ebay, amazon,... - to complicate things, I'm stuck in germany. Great.
Any hints? International shipping won't be much of a problem...
Because this is basically a very simple technology of stacked images. In fact, it is not much more than a proper implementation of a scaling algorithm plus intelligent preloading/guessing of "the data we will need next".
No black magic in there, no "how the frell did they do THAT". For me.
I felt pretty frelled when I got a first glimpse of google maps. That was "revolutionary" stuff. Or Quake I, for that matter. Years earlier, Wolfenstein 3D. Or the Wii-mote.
Fast deep image navigation? w00t.
Surface, that's a neat idea. Wait until they cripple it with DRM and stuff, but it's a neat idea in the first place.
they decide to do, and put some malicious code in the libraries? Or if one of the libraries somehow enables XSS attacks on google mail accounts or the like?
Doesn't sound that new to me. Must be because I've been using "fast" desktop environments/window managers (yes, there IS an overlap) for... hum... feels like ages.
... than about errors. Or, to put it in another way, it looks like the study more or less ignores the DEFINITION of what an "error" is, and simply treads a "wrong answer" as an error.
The errors in this study seem - from the description in the article - to be caused by the loss of concentration. This is, if you read carefully, exactly what is described: the brain seems to drift away, into dreaming or an idle state, which OF COURSE increases the possibility of a wrong result.
This is not the only possibility for an "error", when it comes to a, say, day-to-day working environment. Of course, even there some errors are made because of lacking concentration, but also, errors are made because of lacking information, missinformation, and so on.
Regarding the "useful implications" of this study, there should be more free time at work, allowing the mind to take a rest. That's why companies that allow power napping and smoking corners somehow "perform better" than those forcing their workhorses to sit in front of a screen for 8 hours, only allowing a short break at lunch (i.e. typical cashier workplace).
Now, there are to possible results:
1. some common sense kicks in, and the "working style" is improved
2. their might be a small implanted device, increasing a little electric shock to your stomach whenever you stupid stop to concentrate on your so-important work.
How can any pre-programmed system, which is just a sum of input parameters - and our brain is NOTHING more, otherwise it would break most important rules of physics - somehow "decide" something - other than based upon the input parameters.
Whether this so-called "decision" is made "conscious" or "subconscious" does not really matter. From a "logical" perspective, it's all the same - input parameters leading to output values.
several times before, always such hideous claims. German "society" told them "this is madness", but it doesn't seem like the listened. Or maybe, new management, new luck? Who knows.
Maybe if the whole WORLD shouts at them, something will get through. Or maybe, even not then. *shrug*
They also sued about telefone book names, colors, and other stuff. IMO: just stupid.
Just yesterday, I saw a documentary about children trained for athletics, i.e. Olympics and stuff in China, on TV.
OK, don't believe TV images, but a lot of very young (about 4-5 y.o. I would say) children where obviously *crying* in pain when there bodys flexed by force to stretch their muscles.
It was pure humiliation, obviously against all human rights you could think of. (That they are physically separated from their parents and stuff, adds to this, but not as much as the physical pain, I think. They can talk to their parents regularly, as it seems).
Yeah, just forbid some evil words and pictures, and the world will recognize you as a "cool country". Sorry, not working for me.
>So basically what you're saying is that if you're in an environment that doesn't allow you to write good code its your fault?
In a way, yes. Point being, it's not your fault to be forced to do so, but not to CHANGE the situation is the programmers fault.
If a coder always "does as he's told by (stupid) management", and I did that for a few years, because it seems "logical" to do what you are told to, and keeps writing crappy code, because the deadlines can not be kept otherwise, and does this over and over again - getting more and more frustrated, moral down, writing more and more crappy code because all the other crappy code in the project makes it crappy again...
I think it's more or less clear were this leads to.
Of course, one should not lightly quit is job. In fact, I would say, KEEP your job, and work with your superiors/co-workers, and point the problems out in a way THEY will understand.
"Hey, OK, this CAN be ready tomorrow, but it will be buggy, and as WE both know that the customer really wants feature C, D, E and not only A, and the quick hack would need a complete rewrite in 2 month ANYWAY, *you* are going to loose approx. 2 weeks of manpower if we fix this until tomorrow. Definitly. If we do it right, the customer will whine for two days, but be satisfied after those two days, we won't have (that many;)) bugs, and we won't need a rewrite until 2009. 12 days spare time for that other deadline four weeks ago".
If you *give up*, and say, OK, the world is like that, I HAVE to write crappy code, I personally think it's ultimately YOUR fault, yes.
The world is not static, it can be changed. If you really WANT to write nice code, and push your surroundings, especially with a good group of coder-coworkers, pulling in the same direction, this will ultimately (over time!) lead to a better product, better code, and more fun at work. And if the code written last week is not crappy, it will save your day over and over again. Crappy code *costs* time forever, good code saves time forever and ever.
Of course sometimes crappy code can't be helped. I wrote crappy code the last few weeks, too. We have to. But I always try to avoid it, to push into a direction that leads to a better code. And it simply works. It's about "how much of the code I write is crappy". It should lead to 0% at some time in a very distant future (aka "infinity").
As I do a bit of consulting next to "real" coding work, I have some external experience on how programmers see projects, how the tie-people see projects, and how everything "comes together". Mostly it's about targets and moods between the people, and the "overall spirit". "Just get over with it", or "Hey we could make this COOL".
The Tie-Person wants to finish ASAP, with lowest cost. The programmer wants cool features and lovely code. Both have to talk properly, understand the other one, and work together to finish ASAP *for a great product*.
You clearly see whether people just "code to get finished" or "code because they like their code". And you can see it when you look at the product, at the bug reports, at the UI. It's either "just right", or "crappy".
So:
DON'T WRITE CRAPPY CODE. It's your choice.
This is not a rule. It's more like a... guideline;)
Slashdot Mirror
No, you can not retroactively "drop" the GPLv2. Of course you are free to stop distributing the program/binaries AND source code at any time you want, remove all the GPLv2 bits, recompile it (if there has been no contribution from other people, or the other people consent!) and distribute it as a non-free software. But:
1. this is not retroactively. All old spin-offs, copies, installations, source code instances keep free
2. there likely will be copies, it will hit slashdot, you get a Streisand effect, and it will be hosted in the old GPL version - TEN times. At least. ;)
This whole "oh my god he sells GPL'd software" is stupid and but-ugly. To pick up Linus' talking style. I like free software, but I also like it that people MIGHT try to earn money with it. If it fails as a business modell, because the don't put in any additional value, that's their problem, not mine.
All I need is the release of modified source code. If I want to rebuild and redistribute that program, I could.
Oh, btw: it would be VERY funny if some people actually having a Apple Developer iPhone Account would download and redistribute the program, say, for something between $0 and $2.99. Just to kill of this marketing farce.
... should have READ the GPL in the first place. It's absolutely fine to charge for packaging/compiling/etc.
Of course you have to release the new source code under the GPL, and anyone might, after that, recompile it, and sell it for $0 - if he wants to.
Basically, that's exactly the same what Novell, RedHat, ... do. Just with one program, not with thousands. But it remains the same thing. And I - as a 'GPL2-developer' myself - also don't see any ethical problems. Of course, there are some legal tidbits about the "how to install it without a developers licence" - but that's similar to i.e. any program based upon a proprietary language/toolkit/... - and you actually CAN compile and install the program, given that you are a registered apple iPhone developer. That's not much different than buying M$ Visual Studio 2009 Professional (~$800).
I think those people who say otherwise
a) don't like Apple in general - and from a free software perspective there ARE things that are not nice in Cupertino, it is impossible to deny that
b) might feel betrayed by anyone who sells GPL software in any way, because the STILL did not get the "not free as in beer"-concept. Which is basically a shame.
The .net-Update has "installed" this Add-On secretly for a few months now, as far as I know. It just got into the "normal" Windows auto-update stream, thus annoying more and more people? Or am I somehow mistaken?
... topless at the beach and send it via eMail to her friends, she might go to jail.
If some asshole school teachers strip search her because of false accusation of another student (which in itself would be enough of a scandal), everything is just "fine"?
If that's the current state of the US of A's legislation, you are very much more f*cked than the europeans. And I thought we are bad off with all that internet censorship....
PS: sorry, I forgot. Topless at the beach, 13yo... don't think that would happen on a US beach, would it? Anyway.
She should do what she likes, nothing else. If she talented and open-minded, she should be able to choose for herself - nothing to achieve by "useful suggestions".
Forcing someone into science just because she has talent to handle numbers is just stupid. I know very capable people who did what they like, which wasn't at all what their "feats" would have suggested, and they feel very lucky. On the other hand I also know students who had to fight for every exam, every grade, because the where not that talented or gifted or whatever - but they did it, because it was what they wanted to do - and they achieved what they wanted to do. And they are lucky.
And there are those gifted who rushed through academic career, but simply don't like what they do now for a living at all. They are those who are unlucky.
What counts, after all? Luck, or money? I choose luck - it seems, natural, somehow.
I was somehow "OK" for the NDA on the devkit, but this is simply so annoying and stupid that I really don't know what to say about it.
Or, maybe, apple really fucked this one up.
Even if most people might say different, application development for MacOS is really a great experience, and all tools come for free with MacOS X - even pretty advanced stuff like distributed compiling (of course based upon distcc, so OSS again). It's just great fun, and the Core framework is really, really great.
But what they are doing with the iphone now... I don't get it. They don't expect that this is stopping bad press, do they?
... currently?
It's just "educated guessing", nothing more.
maybe you could simply push the pictures to a lot of sites, if possible even archive.org, and just include some weblinks.
I'd say as the net does not forget very well, you might have a good chance that the pictures will still exist in 25 years ...;)
Otherwise, include multiple media. USB drives (nice standard, pretty ubiquitous, should not go away THAT fast), CD-ROM, DVD, maybe a digital picture frame (why not!) with SD-Card media.
That should cover up 25 years easily. I boot my Linux TV/Video- system (otherwise HD-less, netboot via nfs) of a 5 1/4"-drive that I ripped out of a late 1980s PC. That's pretty close to 25 years ago.
which is the problem here.
FF2 had a warning message about self-signed certificates, too. The problem in my opinion is the way it is presented, and how the "exception" thing is handled from a user perspective.
In FF2, you simply had to accept the certificate, and "go" for it. So far so good. Warning message, "OK, I know what I'm doing".
Downside: anyone just klicks "yes" in ANY message, so where's the security in that?
Anyway, with the new scheme, it's simply annoying, even if you know what you are doing. I.e. I need to use some development installations of software for testing purposes, and of course, whe have to test the ssl-encrypted parts, too. Buying certificates for all this development setups would be stupid (like, throwing the money out of the window).
Why do I have to click FOUR times to simply say "this site is OK for me", while I only have to click once for popups, for auto-fillin for login data, and so on?
Just one simple "add an exception" that does the trick WITHOUT forcing me to:
- *manually* (!!!) FETCH and DISPLAY the certificate before I can accept it (hell, I KNOW it's valid, I generated it myself! And a "normal user" can't understand ANYTHING in the certificate details, so what's the point? And no, they won't "learn", either!) ...
- yes, I'm sure, I want an exception
- yes, for real, I
... this announcement, making a clear statement that this is NOT Duke Nukem Forever?
Sorry for shouting, but this is really a complete mess... it might even lead to nervous breakdowns, common outrages, mass panic etc.pp. - not to mention camping havoc before retail stores...
When I got in touch with a wii for the first time - a friend of mine bought one - he bought Redsteel. I think it was released directly after the Wii.
It's no more or less than a typical ego shooter. "Spoil" the Wii? Yeah, sure.
Advice: Open your eyes. Just have ONE short look upon your own kid's desktop, dear people-who-want-to-prohibit-violance-in-video-games. I'd be suprised if no shooter is to be found there.
Spoil. Ts.
For some small sites, we need to encrypt traffic to protect consumer data from being "spyed on" by misconfigured switches, WLAN eavesdropping, and so on.
For those sites, buying a certificate is possible, but the costs are high compared to the gains (as this is *only* about protection of the data, not about "being sure this is site XY). Based on the certificate IDs/hash it's possible in this environment for anyone to compare whether the certificate is a trustworthy one, or not. The certificate identification is, in this case, possible.
But it's a lot harder to explain why this really, really scary message (it scares the HELL out of customers) appears now and then, when someone moved to a new computer or something.
The old FF2 behaviour was "better" in this respect.
I also see benefits of the efforts made to clarify this encryption/identification stuff for normal users, like the green address bar. That's really a gift, showing the user "everything all-right with your banking application or amazon store".
But this behaviour marking "self-signed" certificates as something über-evil out of the deepest depth of hell, is crossing a line a bit to far, in my opinion.
A short warning with a better explanation, or even a yellow bar - encrypted, but not "that secure" - might have been a better way.
Well, patches welcome, I hope :)
Still better than just praying the 2012-expected Internet Nightmare 9 misteriously replacing the old behaviour with something worse. You know what I'm talking about, are you? ;)
Bike. Don't do it at home, get some sunlight/fresh air. You won't crumble to dust.
I don't do it on a very regular base, just about once a week, but if you get to something like 30km twice a week, you'll gain a lot of stamina, and of course loose some weight.
I like biking (fresh air, not some nonesense machine in the basement) because
- you can do it on your own
- it's really simpel, you don't even have to do a lot of warm-up - just start slowly
- it's fairly easy to keep the strain at good levels for your training, pulse between 130 and 140 and stuff
- you almost never will have any problems with muscle ache the next day, even if you drove a longer distance
Of course, this is not an option if you live in central New York, because of, well less fresh air and no really nice riding places?
~:-o
Damn, now this is messy. I just *HAVE* to play myth again, thanks for the tag. Additionally, I just noticed I missed realMyth. What a shame, it looks pretty nice - and fun.
But: where to get it? It's more than sold out, nothing on ebay, amazon, ... - to complicate things, I'm stuck in germany. Great.
Any hints? International shipping won't be much of a problem...
... or WILL, when it comes to all this "copyright stuff".
:(
The EU is just preparing more and more ridiculous legislation. Prepare for impact
Oh come now, that's not "revolutionary". Why not?
Because this is basically a very simple technology of stacked images. In fact, it is not much more than a proper implementation of a scaling algorithm plus intelligent preloading/guessing of "the data we will need next".
No black magic in there, no "how the frell did they do THAT". For me.
I felt pretty frelled when I got a first glimpse of google maps. That was "revolutionary" stuff. Or Quake I, for that matter. Years earlier, Wolfenstein 3D. Or the Wii-mote.
Fast deep image navigation? w00t.
Surface, that's a neat idea. Wait until they cripple it with DRM and stuff, but it's a neat idea in the first place.
they decide to do, and put some malicious code in the libraries? Or if one of the libraries somehow enables XSS attacks on google mail accounts or the like?
I don't like it.
- now, is that a good thing, or a bad thing? I, as a vista-non-user, wonder. Seriously...?
Doesn't sound that new to me. Must be because I've been using "fast" desktop environments/window managers (yes, there IS an overlap) for... hum... feels like ages.
... than about errors. Or, to put it in another way, it looks like the study more or less ignores the DEFINITION of what an "error" is, and simply treads a "wrong answer" as an error.
The errors in this study seem - from the description in the article - to be caused by the loss of concentration. This is, if you read carefully, exactly what is described: the brain seems to drift away, into dreaming or an idle state, which OF COURSE increases the possibility of a wrong result.
This is not the only possibility for an "error", when it comes to a, say, day-to-day working environment. Of course, even there some errors are made because of lacking concentration, but also, errors are made because of lacking information, missinformation, and so on.
Regarding the "useful implications" of this study, there should be more free time at work, allowing the mind to take a rest. That's why companies that allow power napping and smoking corners somehow "perform better" than those forcing their workhorses to sit in front of a screen for 8 hours, only allowing a short break at lunch (i.e. typical cashier workplace).
Now, there are to possible results:
1. some common sense kicks in, and the "working style" is improved
2. their might be a small implanted device, increasing a little electric shock to your stomach whenever you stupid stop to concentrate on your so-important work.
than about whether free will "exists or not".
How can any pre-programmed system, which is just a sum of input parameters - and our brain is NOTHING more, otherwise it would break most important rules of physics - somehow "decide" something - other than based upon the input parameters.
Whether this so-called "decision" is made "conscious" or "subconscious" does not really matter. From a "logical" perspective, it's all the same - input parameters leading to output values.
approx. in 2011. Peace of cake :)
several times before, always such hideous claims. German "society" told them "this is madness", but it doesn't seem like the listened. Or maybe, new management, new luck? Who knows.
Maybe if the whole WORLD shouts at them, something will get through. Or maybe, even not then. *shrug*
They also sued about telefone book names, colors, and other stuff. IMO: just stupid.
Just yesterday, I saw a documentary about children trained for athletics, i.e. Olympics and stuff in China, on TV.
OK, don't believe TV images, but a lot of very young (about 4-5 y.o. I would say) children where obviously *crying* in pain when there bodys flexed by force to stretch their muscles.
It was pure humiliation, obviously against all human rights you could think of. (That they are physically separated from their parents and stuff, adds to this, but not as much as the physical pain, I think. They can talk to their parents regularly, as it seems).
Yeah, just forbid some evil words and pictures, and the world will recognize you as a "cool country". Sorry, not working for me.
>So basically what you're saying is that if you're in an environment that doesn't allow you to write good code its your fault?
;)) bugs, and we won't need a rewrite until 2009. 12 days spare time for that other deadline four weeks ago".
... guideline ;)
In a way, yes. Point being, it's not your fault to be forced to do so, but not to CHANGE the situation is the programmers fault.
If a coder always "does as he's told by (stupid) management", and I did that for a few years, because it seems "logical" to do what you are told to, and keeps writing crappy code, because the deadlines can not be kept otherwise, and does this over and over again - getting more and more frustrated, moral down, writing more and more crappy code because all the other crappy code in the project makes it crappy again...
I think it's more or less clear were this leads to.
Of course, one should not lightly quit is job. In fact, I would say, KEEP your job, and work with your superiors/co-workers, and point the problems out in a way THEY will understand.
"Hey, OK, this CAN be ready tomorrow, but it will be buggy, and as WE both know that the customer really wants feature C, D, E and not only A, and the quick hack would need a complete rewrite in 2 month ANYWAY, *you* are going to loose approx. 2 weeks of manpower if we fix this until tomorrow. Definitly. If we do it right, the customer will whine for two days, but be satisfied after those two days, we won't have (that many
If you *give up*, and say, OK, the world is like that, I HAVE to write crappy code, I personally think it's ultimately YOUR fault, yes.
The world is not static, it can be changed. If you really WANT to write nice code, and push your surroundings, especially with a good group of coder-coworkers, pulling in the same direction, this will ultimately (over time!) lead to a better product, better code, and more fun at work. And if the code written last week is not crappy, it will save your day over and over again. Crappy code *costs* time forever, good code saves time forever and ever.
Of course sometimes crappy code can't be helped. I wrote crappy code the last few weeks, too. We have to. But I always try to avoid it, to push into a direction that leads to a better code. And it simply works. It's about "how much of the code I write is crappy". It should lead to 0% at some time in a very distant future (aka "infinity").
As I do a bit of consulting next to "real" coding work, I have some external experience on how programmers see projects, how the tie-people see projects, and how everything "comes together". Mostly it's about targets and moods between the people, and the "overall spirit". "Just get over with it", or "Hey we could make this COOL".
The Tie-Person wants to finish ASAP, with lowest cost. The programmer wants cool features and lovely code. Both have to talk properly, understand the other one, and work together to finish ASAP *for a great product*.
You clearly see whether people just "code to get finished" or "code because they like their code". And you can see it when you look at the product, at the bug reports, at the UI. It's either "just right", or "crappy".
So:
DON'T WRITE CRAPPY CODE. It's your choice.
This is not a rule. It's more like a