Ugh. DocBook is a good way to keep people who would otherwise document from doing so - it unnecessarily raises the bar to starting.
Your average schmuck these days can write simple plain HTML with zero startup effort, so if you ask them to do so they're likely to since it's no great bother and the format is remarkably tolerant of mistakes. If you ask them to go learn docbook first, there is a good chance they'll never get around to it, or if they do then it won't compile or look reasonable since they never figured out how to process their docbook and look at the results.
It horribly violates the 'simplest thing that could possibly work' principle.
Yes, they do think that. The rules schools make you agree to tend to be even worse than employment contracts, and you have less (zero) ability to get out of them.
For a pretty standard example that I'm familiar with, Georgia Tech: if it's for a class or you use their 'resources' (dorm? network connection? stuff you learned in class? conversation with a prof?), it's theirs: "Ownership rights to Intellectual Property developed by faculty, staff or students of GIT shall reside with the inventor or creator of such Intellectual Property provided that: (1) there is no use, except in a purely incidental way, of GIT resources in the creation of such Intellectual Property (unless such resources are available without charge to the public); (2) the Intellectual Property is not prepared in accordance with the terms of GIT contract or grant; (3) the Intellectual Property is not developed by faculty, staff or students as a specific institution assignment. The nature and extent of the use of Institution resources shall be subject to institution regulations."
They will kindly split the money to be made from your own creation with you; but it still means you technically can't create GPLed code for class, since you don't own the copyright.
In practice, it seems ignored, but I *hate* relying on selective enforcement. So much for bettering all humanity or any such noble goal; money gets in the way.
Why does Katz write reviews?
on
Review: Showtime
·
· Score: 0, Troll
I mean, don't we already know he doesn't like anything, thus making his expressing this opinion unnecessary? Seriously, I could have written this Katz review, although I would have added a chapter digressing into the future of technology and how actors didn't grok technology enough to be worthy of respect or something.
If you have a regular (hourly/daily) build that smoke-tests and reports the results to everyone, people will be more willing to sync to the latest and trust that they won't lose lots of time with problems. Embarass anyone that breaks the build, make sure that everyone understands it gets fixed ASAP when it breaks, checking in broken code is NOT ok; and then people can sync every few hours or every day, and the problem simply goes away.
Primarily for unused keyphrases
on
Google Juice
·
· Score: 1
This works best on presently unclaimed keyphrases. If enough people on the net decide that "evil empire" points to one particular place and link it as such, why shouldn't Google respond with that link when asked what the net thinks "evil empire" is?
As for commercial cross-site linking, isn't this roughly the net equivalent of building a bigger building on main street to get more attention?
Yep, getting students in school worked so gosh-darned well for Apple. IBM's strategy of getting people at work was such a disaster, how stupid of MicroSoft to go that route.
'helped make'? No way, the ads were the *best* part of the game. I still have dreams about Pogo getting a fast car, long after I stopped dreaming about my latest failed attempt at passing a rampage challenge.
Nope. Govt. regulation at work. If Intel had been allowed to keep their chip interface and methods 100% proprietary and thus keep AMD from developing a compatible chip, then no competition could have survived. Competition only survived because Intel had to do cross-licensing of patents and copyrights after AMD challenged them in court.
Now, insert lots of comments about MicroSoft and undocumented APIs, and take your 100% pure free market hurrahs to some other subject where they might do some good. Leave them out of the dangerously monopolized computer field, though. Unregulated competition only works where it's feasible to compete.
1) Incorporate.
2) Program P2P file sharing system.
3) Host enough Britney Spears songs/videos to get RIAA attention.
4) Sell company to RIAA, Get Rich Quick!
The problem isn't the cheatfinder.
Using a program to narrow down the field of what a real human needs to scrutinize is fine. The problem is when real humans refuse to use reason, based on the apparent belief that a computer said it so it must be true. In my experience, this has been the situation at Georgia Tech, and it's a sad situation indeed.
Your argument is essentially that we can all be safe and happy, knowing that careful selective enforcement from the responsible contract writer will keep things reasonable? No thank you. Selective enforcement is not the sort of thing I'm willing to rely on for my privacy.
TiVo's software presently does everything in these claims.
The interesting part is that Replay's software doesn't presently do all of this - it doesn't pick out shows you might like based on what you've recorded before. Only TiVo does that.
I just hope they can sort something out between themselves; I'd hate to see my TiVo in trouble.
This article is a misleading justification of price gouging. "The good news is, the dishonest people who know how to do it are already doing it..."; clearly anyone with two computers must be a dishonest thief.
They discuss sharing amongst neighbors, but what they are really upset about is not being able to charge for every device I own or sharing amongst roommates. Nowhere is the fact that even toasters are getting IP addresses mentioned, and none of the technology they are looking forward to will allow the provider to differentiate between my toaster and my neighbor's computer.
So the interesting question to me is, why does my service provider deserve more $$$s because I own three computers, a net-connected TiVo, and an internet enabled toaster or stoplight? Aren't they still just providing me a single connection and some bandwidth? What right do they have to charge for my toaster? Do they have a contract with *me*, or with *my device*? They seem to think they are providing my computer with a service; I happen to believe my computer can't sign a contract, so the service is provided to me, and this price gouging shouldn't be allowed.
"But other critics said Google bears its share of the blame."
Why?!
Google is finding documents that any web browser could find. The fault belongs to the idiots who publicly posted sensitive documents in the first place. Why doesn't the article mention this anywhere? Garbage reporting if I've ever seen it.
this is computer
programing. I know people who tought themselves Basic in a morning. I belive that I can learn any computer language you wish me to program in, in under a week. I can read well written programs in most lanuages without any learning time. I'm not special, any compitent programer can do it.
This is absurd. History might be lost because some deemed-worthless photos might not be saved? What about photos that were never taken in the first place? What a tragedy, we had better constantly record everything everywhere to make sure that no history is lost!
This is an unconsidered reflexive aversion to change, and I hope nobody listens.
I am sick and tired of every person I meet at a party thinking they can do my job if they only spend 2 weeks reading the right book. "Oh, you're a programmer? Yeah, I'm gonna learn me that HTML so I can get paid like you do." Now it's going to be "Yeah, I hear they're teaching prisoners to do that computer stuff." Great. I wish there was some way to convince people that all computer jobs are not created equal, and that 'g0tz m4d computer 5ki11z' != 'worth paying a lot'...
Like many others, your company is planning on doing an IPO in order to satisfy employee's expectation of stock options. It seems to me that being public (and therefore accountable to stockholders) is contrary to the way you presently run ArsDigita - open sourcing things you could sell, for example, could be construed as hurting their investment by not capitalizing on a potential revenue stream. How do you intend to resolve this conflict? Why not avoid going public in order to run the company as you wish?
In general, how can public corporations avoid the all too common quarterly earnings obsession and do important things that may not reflect well on the bottom line? Is there a better way to still satisfy employees without dealing with the problems from being publicly traded?
First, you say that the info learned in a CS curriculum can't be learned in only a year. Then, you state that the info is so easy people shuld be able to learn it on their own. One would think the obvious compromise between your two positions is that most bright people could learn it in an intense year given guidance.
I'm really surprised this hasn't been done more often - it seems to be similar to intensive language courses, where a relatively complicated field that normally takes a long time to learn is accelerated through total immersion. The military does the same thing in lots of areas - it tends to not turn out the strongest independant thinkers, but it turns out people who know what they need to know to do the work quite well.
My personal experience at Georgia Tech is that there has only really been a year of serious programming work, and the other three-four years have been relatively generic - that part of my experience could easily be replaced by any undergrad degree from any school.
If you feel it takes longer, great, use the materials at a slower pace. If you feel people can do it quicker, great, use the materials at a quicker pace. Why all the complaining - what's the downside?
Slashdot Mirror
Completely different. There are stiff penalties for lying to the government. Grocery store cards, on the other hand, are well addressed by Three Dead Trolls in a Baggie's "The Privacy Song"
Ugh. DocBook is a good way to keep people who would otherwise document from doing so - it unnecessarily raises the bar to starting.
Your average schmuck these days can write simple plain HTML with zero startup effort, so if you ask them to do so they're likely to since it's no great bother and the format is remarkably tolerant of mistakes. If you ask them to go learn docbook first, there is a good chance they'll never get around to it, or if they do then it won't compile or look reasonable since they never figured out how to process their docbook and look at the results.
It horribly violates the 'simplest thing that could possibly work' principle.
Yes, they do think that. The rules schools make you agree to tend to be even worse than employment contracts, and you have less (zero) ability to get out of them.
For a pretty standard example that I'm familiar with, Georgia Tech: if it's for a class or you use their 'resources' (dorm? network connection? stuff you learned in class? conversation with a prof?), it's theirs: "Ownership rights to Intellectual Property developed by faculty, staff or students of GIT shall reside with the inventor or creator of such Intellectual Property provided that: (1) there is no use, except in a purely incidental way, of GIT resources in the creation of such Intellectual Property (unless such resources are available without charge to the public); (2) the Intellectual Property is not prepared in accordance with the terms of GIT contract or grant; (3) the Intellectual Property is not developed by faculty, staff or students as a specific institution assignment. The nature and extent of the use of Institution resources shall be subject to institution regulations."
They will kindly split the money to be made from your own creation with you; but it still means you technically can't create GPLed code for class, since you don't own the copyright.
In practice, it seems ignored, but I *hate* relying on selective enforcement. So much for bettering all humanity or any such noble goal; money gets in the way.
I mean, don't we already know he doesn't like anything, thus making his expressing this opinion unnecessary? Seriously, I could have written this Katz review, although I would have added a chapter digressing into the future of technology and how actors didn't grok technology enough to be worthy of respect or something.
Everyone needs to stay up to date all the time.
If you have a regular (hourly/daily) build that smoke-tests and reports the results to everyone, people will be more willing to sync to the latest and trust that they won't lose lots of time with problems. Embarass anyone that breaks the build, make sure that everyone understands it gets fixed ASAP when it breaks, checking in broken code is NOT ok; and then people can sync every few hours or every day, and the problem simply goes away.
This works best on presently unclaimed keyphrases. If enough people on the net decide that "evil empire" points to one particular place and link it as such, why shouldn't Google respond with that link when asked what the net thinks "evil empire" is?
As for commercial cross-site linking, isn't this roughly the net equivalent of building a bigger building on main street to get more attention?
In short, what's the big deal?
Yep, getting students in school worked so gosh-darned well for Apple. IBM's strategy of getting people at work was such a disaster, how stupid of MicroSoft to go that route.
Real stories. Anecdotes from real jobs. Experiences from real projects, with real companies, with names of those involved.
It's interesting to note that they changed their privacy policy just in time to allow them to do this.
'helped make'? No way, the ads were the *best* part of the game. I still have dreams about Pogo getting a fast car, long after I stopped dreaming about my latest failed attempt at passing a rampage challenge.
Remember it fondly, of course - but why does the world really need yet another OS?
Nope. Govt. regulation at work. If Intel had been allowed to keep their chip interface and methods 100% proprietary and thus keep AMD from developing a compatible chip, then no competition could have survived. Competition only survived because Intel had to do cross-licensing of patents and copyrights after AMD challenged them in court.
Now, insert lots of comments about MicroSoft and undocumented APIs, and take your 100% pure free market hurrahs to some other subject where they might do some good. Leave them out of the dangerously monopolized computer field, though. Unregulated competition only works where it's feasible to compete.
1) Incorporate.
2) Program P2P file sharing system.
3) Host enough Britney Spears songs/videos to get RIAA attention.
4) Sell company to RIAA, Get Rich Quick!
The problem isn't the cheatfinder.
Using a program to narrow down the field of what a real human needs to scrutinize is fine. The problem is when real humans refuse to use reason, based on the apparent belief that a computer said it so it must be true. In my experience, this has been the situation at Georgia Tech, and it's a sad situation indeed.
Your argument is essentially that we can all be safe and happy, knowing that careful selective enforcement from the responsible contract writer will keep things reasonable? No thank you. Selective enforcement is not the sort of thing I'm willing to rely on for my privacy.
TiVo's software presently does everything in these claims.
The interesting part is that Replay's software doesn't presently do all of this - it doesn't pick out shows you might like based on what you've recorded before. Only TiVo does that.
I just hope they can sort something out between themselves; I'd hate to see my TiVo in trouble.
This article is a misleading justification of price gouging. "The good news is, the dishonest people who know how to do it are already doing it..."; clearly anyone with two computers must be a dishonest thief.
They discuss sharing amongst neighbors, but what they are really upset about is not being able to charge for every device I own or sharing amongst roommates. Nowhere is the fact that even toasters are getting IP addresses mentioned, and none of the technology they are looking forward to will allow the provider to differentiate between my toaster and my neighbor's computer.
So the interesting question to me is, why does my service provider deserve more $$$s because I own three computers, a net-connected TiVo, and an internet enabled toaster or stoplight? Aren't they still just providing me a single connection and some bandwidth? What right do they have to charge for my toaster? Do they have a contract with *me*, or with *my device*? They seem to think they are providing my computer with a service; I happen to believe my computer can't sign a contract, so the service is provided to me, and this price gouging shouldn't be allowed.
"But other critics said Google bears its share of the blame."
Why?!
Google is finding documents that any web browser could find. The fault belongs to the idiots who publicly posted sensitive documents in the first place. Why doesn't the article mention this anywhere? Garbage reporting if I've ever seen it.
Gee, perhaps you should learn English now!
This is absurd. History might be lost because some deemed-worthless photos might not be saved? What about photos that were never taken in the first place? What a tragedy, we had better constantly record everything everywhere to make sure that no history is lost!
This is an unconsidered reflexive aversion to change, and I hope nobody listens.
I am sick and tired of every person I meet at a party thinking they can do my job if they only spend 2 weeks reading the right book. "Oh, you're a programmer? Yeah, I'm gonna learn me that HTML so I can get paid like you do." Now it's going to be "Yeah, I hear they're teaching prisoners to do that computer stuff." Great. I wish there was some way to convince people that all computer jobs are not created equal, and that 'g0tz m4d computer 5ki11z' != 'worth paying a lot'...
Easy solution: Cancel the home line or keep it just for TiVo updates, and use a cellphone for all communication. No solicitations.
My contract does indeed mention more than 40 hours and extra time off (5 weeks) because of it.
Perhaps you should just hold out for a better contract.
Like many others, your company is planning on doing an IPO in order to satisfy employee's expectation of stock options. It seems to me that being public (and therefore accountable to stockholders) is contrary to the way you presently run ArsDigita - open sourcing things you could sell, for example, could be construed as hurting their investment by not capitalizing on a potential revenue stream. How do you intend to resolve this conflict? Why not avoid going public in order to run the company as you wish?
In general, how can public corporations avoid the all too common quarterly earnings obsession and do important things that may not reflect well on the bottom line? Is there a better way to still satisfy employees without dealing with the problems from being publicly traded?
First, you say that the info learned in a CS curriculum can't be learned in only a year. Then, you state that the info is so easy people shuld be able to learn it on their own.
One would think the obvious compromise between your two positions is that most bright people could learn it in an intense year given guidance.
I'm really surprised this hasn't been done more often - it seems to be similar to intensive language courses, where a relatively complicated field that normally takes a long time to learn is accelerated through total immersion. The military does the same thing in lots of areas - it tends to not turn out the strongest independant thinkers, but it turns out people who know what they need to know to do the work quite well.
My personal experience at Georgia Tech is that there has only really been a year of serious programming work, and the other three-four years have been relatively generic - that part of my experience could easily be replaced by any undergrad degree from any school.
If you feel it takes longer, great, use the materials at a slower pace. If you feel people can do it quicker, great, use the materials at a quicker pace. Why all the complaining - what's the downside?