I was thinking of the apps I've seen where the guy hard coded a DB config into the app so it could connect to a DB to get the configuration information for the app from the DB so it could connect to a different DB, or where it collects a ton of data from the web and stores it in text fields in the database. Also, people tend to put a bit too much logic in stored procedures, or depend on database triggers to run stuff outside of the database; the latest atrocity I've seen is a.NET trigger in MS SQL that calls external web services as part of a high load transactional database - turns out it doesn't work out so well.
Some of it's personal preference I guess, as well as the industry you work in.
Having worked with a large number of undergrad and recent graduates in computers, here's what I'd want to see more of in a candidate:
Take the time to learn about relational databases. Not just SQL. Learn why there's a relational model and why it was developed (yes, pedantic shitheads, there is no widely available pure relational database; eat a dick). Learn what normalization is. Also, shoving everything into the database isn't always the best idea, and some stuff doesn't need a db behind it.
Learn to work with an SCM -subversion, CVS, whatever. Understand branching and merging, and how you'd maintain a product over time. It's handy and there's tons of developers that have worked for years and don't get it right.
Don't try to optimize stuff up front. The algorithm you pick typically doesn't have to be the fastest, nor do you have to do everything the most efficient way the first time around. Do something that's clean and easy to make changes to. That's an art, and it takes practice. Too often, I see people worry about making things fast before making them right. Don't do that.
Learn how to do testing. Not just quickly clicking through shit. Learn to be through, use unit testing when appropriate.
Do the simplest thing that could possibly work. Don't add features for the future, etc.
There's plenty of other stuff. Don't depend on code generators, don't try to use every single new thing that comes down the pike, XML doesn't belong in 95% of the places you find it, most of the time the programming language you pick doesn't make that big a difference, etc. I like people who understand how to use Unix shell tools, mostly because you can get some simple tasks done quickly by stringing them together.
Judges give instructions to the jurors hearing a case, including instructions about the nature of the law pertaining to the case at hand.
If the lawyer "misspoke," in his statements to the jury, wasn't it the job of the judge in the case to point out the actual requirements of the law? Otherwise, why have a judge? We should just make our legal system a contest between two people making up the most plausible bullshit they can muster.
Possession is 9 tenths of the law, right? The guy with the disk has the data. Controlling your personal data once it's not on a medium you physically can control access to is about the same impossible problem as DRM.
The desktop monopoly gave them the billions of dollars needed to enter a market, sell units at a loss, and buy developers to write games for their platform.
You probably could have come up with that if you'd given it a half second's thought.
Unless the US was the legitimate government of Afghanistan, it's putting troops there without the consent of the local government constitutes an invasion.
The consequence is that I also don't work that hard when I'm actually at work.
It's easier for me to justify randomly screwing around on the internet or working on personal coding/whatever at work because I wind up checking email and working over weekends to get things done. I think it's fair. They steal some of my free time, I waste some of their paid time.
I needed to connect to the Mac for file sharing and Ubuntu presented me with a GUI scp! I hadn't been that excited about an os, since working on UNIX for the first time. I was very impressed.
On OSX, give macfuse a try, with sshfs. It's not a client. It's just a filesystem.
Perhaps if you'd taken the time to click to the story, then actually read the whole thing, you might have noticed a link to the original story tucked down at the bottom. In InformationWeek. A US publication.
You will now apologize for being so hasty in your judgment and rude in your choice of terminology.
Somehow, those clever bastards managed to buy a bunch of highly esoteric computer parts that I can run down to a local computer shop and pick up for at most a couple hundred bucks a pop. What evil persons could have sold them all those processors?
The breathless panic in the American media about everything Iran does is getting a little old.
And Japan? Yeah, it was a threat. It was also a sovereign nation with an army and a navy, unlike the guys who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, who are either dead or living in caves, and would have been in no better shape had we skipped the Iraq adventure alltogether.
Sigh. So, my calling statistics "magic?" That was what we call sarcasm. It's not magic, it's mathematics.
What's also not magic is reading the article and finding, tucked away near the end, a note that the study does actually control for smoking as a factor. So, the researchers clearly have information about the smoking habits of the population being studied (or at least, of the sample therefrom).
So, you see, there's no need for me "analyze data to create information that is not in the data," as you say, since that information was clearly in, you know, the data.
I also have an idea who's smarter than I - it's not you.
and this time one with no reading comprehension skills and love of hearing himself talk.
I understand it's not a controlled study. I never said it was. Were you aware that it's actually possible to use a magical thing called statistics to help with analysis of data such that you could actually remove confounding factors as part of the analysis?
Clearly, NOBODY EVER thought to try to control for other health factors in the study.
Obviously, you, and only you, have noticed this awful, systematic flaw in this study that obviously didn't have to pass an kind of rigorous review process to get published in JAMA.
Maybe if enough scumbag IP holding companies extort enough money out of big corporations, those corporations will lobby congress to get the patent laws changed.
Cause it sure looks like neither the best interests of the country and its citizens, nor general sanity are enough to get them to do anything. Here's hoping there's enough pressure from this to get some corruption going in our favor.
I don't think you understood what I was asking. You seem to think that I was picking on the guy (or girl) for violating some prescriptive rule about how sentences ought to be written. I wasn't.
I'm actually curious if what s/he said is a legitimate way of phrasing things in his dialect of English. To me, it sounds very ungrammatical - not in the "never end a sentence with a preposition, even though it happens all the time in regular speech and nobody even blinks at it" sense, but in the sense that it's not a phrase I'd ever produce naturally because that's just not how my English works.
I asked if s/he was a native speaker because people who are non-native speakers of a language tend to have very different grammaticality judgments than native speakers. I asked where s/he was from because there is a significant amount of variation in some syntactic features by region.
Really; I'm a linguist, and I'm interested syntax and what constitutes possible sentences in English (and other languages).
If you really think that phrase is grammatically correct English, I'd love to know if English is your native language and if so, where you come from. Seriously. I'm interested in syntactic variation and change and I've never encountered a variety of English in which that'd be ok, prescriptively or otherwise.
I wiped my laptop (a rapidly aging Latitude D800) and installed Gutsy, and the install was flawless and it rebooted fine and even properly recognized the correct X mode settings for my LDC panel and video card, as well as my wireless. It's the most hassle free OS install I've ever had on any machine.
It's not perfect (what the fuck is with NetworkManager and nm-applet - they're crap), but it generally works quite well.
That's certain to result in a strongly worded letter with ABSOLUTELY NO consequences at all.
At least, if one is to gauge by Congress' reaction to the widespread stonewalling by every part of the Bush administration and it's corporate political allies.
Slashdot Mirror
The Bush administration's longstanding record of anti-environmentalism is suddenly wiped clean by a single, empty, token gesture.
Yay.
I was thinking of the apps I've seen where the guy hard coded a DB config into the app so it could connect to a DB to get the configuration information for the app from the DB so it could connect to a different DB, or where it collects a ton of data from the web and stores it in text fields in the database. Also, people tend to put a bit too much logic in stored procedures, or depend on database triggers to run stuff outside of the database; the latest atrocity I've seen is a .NET trigger in MS SQL that calls external web services as part of a high load transactional database - turns out it doesn't work out so well.
Some of it's personal preference I guess, as well as the industry you work in.
-
Take the time to learn about relational databases. Not just SQL. Learn why there's a relational model and why it was developed (yes, pedantic shitheads, there is no widely available pure relational database; eat a dick). Learn what normalization is. Also, shoving everything into the database isn't always the best idea, and some stuff doesn't need a db behind it.
- Learn to work with an SCM -subversion, CVS, whatever. Understand branching and merging, and how you'd maintain a product over time. It's handy and there's tons of developers that have worked for years and don't get it right.
- Don't try to optimize stuff up front. The algorithm you pick typically doesn't have to be the fastest, nor do you have to do everything the most efficient way the first time around. Do something that's clean and easy to make changes to. That's an art, and it takes practice. Too often, I see people worry about making things fast before making them right. Don't do that.
- Learn how to do testing. Not just quickly clicking through shit. Learn to be through, use unit testing when appropriate.
- Do the simplest thing that could possibly work. Don't add features for the future, etc.
There's plenty of other stuff. Don't depend on code generators, don't try to use every single new thing that comes down the pike, XML doesn't belong in 95% of the places you find it, most of the time the programming language you pick doesn't make that big a difference, etc. I like people who understand how to use Unix shell tools, mostly because you can get some simple tasks done quickly by stringing them together.Judges give instructions to the jurors hearing a case, including instructions about the nature of the law pertaining to the case at hand.
If the lawyer "misspoke," in his statements to the jury, wasn't it the job of the judge in the case to point out the actual requirements of the law? Otherwise, why have a judge? We should just make our legal system a contest between two people making up the most plausible bullshit they can muster.
Possession is 9 tenths of the law, right? The guy with the disk has the data. Controlling your personal data once it's not on a medium you physically can control access to is about the same impossible problem as DRM.
You mom had you as the result of working a donkey show in Guadalajara. So why would anyone listen to a jackass like you?
The desktop monopoly gave them the billions of dollars needed to enter a market, sell units at a loss, and buy developers to write games for their platform.
You probably could have come up with that if you'd given it a half second's thought.
Unless the US was the legitimate government of Afghanistan, it's putting troops there without the consent of the local government constitutes an invasion.
The consequence is that I also don't work that hard when I'm actually at work.
It's easier for me to justify randomly screwing around on the internet or working on personal coding/whatever at work because I wind up checking email and working over weekends to get things done. I think it's fair. They steal some of my free time, I waste some of their paid time.
On OSX, give macfuse a try, with sshfs. It's not a client. It's just a filesystem.
Perhaps if you'd taken the time to click to the story, then actually read the whole thing, you might have noticed a link to the original story tucked down at the bottom. In InformationWeek. A US publication.
You will now apologize for being so hasty in your judgment and rude in your choice of terminology.
Somehow, those clever bastards managed to buy a bunch of highly esoteric computer parts that I can run down to a local computer shop and pick up for at most a couple hundred bucks a pop. What evil persons could have sold them all those processors?
The breathless panic in the American media about everything Iran does is getting a little old.
It never has and never will.
And Japan? Yeah, it was a threat. It was also a sovereign nation with an army and a navy, unlike the guys who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, who are either dead or living in caves, and would have been in no better shape had we skipped the Iraq adventure alltogether.
Sigh. So, my calling statistics "magic?" That was what we call sarcasm. It's not magic, it's mathematics.
What's also not magic is reading the article and finding, tucked away near the end, a note that the study does actually control for smoking as a factor. So, the researchers clearly have information about the smoking habits of the population being studied (or at least, of the sample therefrom).
So, you see, there's no need for me "analyze data to create information that is not in the data," as you say, since that information was clearly in, you know, the data.
I also have an idea who's smarter than I - it's not you.
and this time one with no reading comprehension skills and love of hearing himself talk.
I understand it's not a controlled study. I never said it was. Were you aware that it's actually possible to use a magical thing called statistics to help with analysis of data such that you could actually remove confounding factors as part of the analysis?
Go back to reading your scifi and fantasy books.
Clearly, NOBODY EVER thought to try to control for other health factors in the study.
Obviously, you, and only you, have noticed this awful, systematic flaw in this study that obviously didn't have to pass an kind of rigorous review process to get published in JAMA.
Praise be, we've found a new Einstein!
But what caliber and action?
Maybe if enough scumbag IP holding companies extort enough money out of big corporations, those corporations will lobby congress to get the patent laws changed.
Cause it sure looks like neither the best interests of the country and its citizens, nor general sanity are enough to get them to do anything. Here's hoping there's enough pressure from this to get some corruption going in our favor.
And, yes, I know that's naive.
Bullshit. Maybe 1/3 are dumb enough to cop to it.
Perhaps you've got it backwards and only 1/3 don't violate IT policies. And even that sounds light.
I don't think you understood what I was asking. You seem to think that I was picking on the guy (or girl) for violating some prescriptive rule about how sentences ought to be written. I wasn't.
I'm actually curious if what s/he said is a legitimate way of phrasing things in his dialect of English. To me, it sounds very ungrammatical - not in the "never end a sentence with a preposition, even though it happens all the time in regular speech and nobody even blinks at it" sense, but in the sense that it's not a phrase I'd ever produce naturally because that's just not how my English works.
I asked if s/he was a native speaker because people who are non-native speakers of a language tend to have very different grammaticality judgments than native speakers. I asked where s/he was from because there is a significant amount of variation in some syntactic features by region.
Really; I'm a linguist, and I'm interested syntax and what constitutes possible sentences in English (and other languages).
If you really think that phrase is grammatically correct English, I'd love to know if English is your native language and if so, where you come from. Seriously. I'm interested in syntactic variation and change and I've never encountered a variety of English in which that'd be ok, prescriptively or otherwise.
I wiped my laptop (a rapidly aging Latitude D800) and installed Gutsy, and the install was flawless and it rebooted fine and even properly recognized the correct X mode settings for my LDC panel and video card, as well as my wireless. It's the most hassle free OS install I've ever had on any machine.
It's not perfect (what the fuck is with NetworkManager and nm-applet - they're crap), but it generally works quite well.
Different bugs for different folks, I guess.
Here's hoping the kid winds up having to pay for everything, getting sued for millions, and having to spend several years in prison.
That's certain to result in a strongly worded letter with ABSOLUTELY NO consequences at all.
At least, if one is to gauge by Congress' reaction to the widespread stonewalling by every part of the Bush administration and it's corporate political allies.
Salvage, that's what it was.
Seriously, why is novell 3.1 still better than whatever latest windows server os is out there?