My company is looking for experienced developers in the Denver area without much luck. They may be out there but they seem to be behind a wall of recruiters or otherwise unavailable due to not wanting to jump from their current jobs. I think the unemployment rate for.net developers here is something like 2%.
Yes, we need more. A common Slashdot response is that the employers aren't paying enough to attract the talent. Well, if the talent isn't worth the money in terms of bang for buck for the company, then I guess that's that, employer doesn't get a new employee and the employee doesn't get the job. Its unfortunate for both sides at that point, the economics just don't add up.
I have no answer. I wanted to comment that this is the most pertinent "Ask Slashdot" that I've seen in the last five years.
I would guess any router who's firmware was open-sourced.
We are halfway through the process? In the office where I sit, approximately 100% of the applications used by our staff are thick client. Nobody uses web apps because they are slow and have poor user experiences compared to thick client native apps.
How can tablets/phones/whatever replace the desire for a screen bigger than 10" and/or a real keyboard designed for typing and/or a real mouse designed for precision?
Sure, I believe for consuming media content "on the train" and a small fraction of business purposes, a touchscreen is sufficient and arguably better than a desktop, but I cannot see a future where these small touchscreens can replace the vast majority of business purposes which require lots of user input and accurate cursor control on a screen big enough to do multitasking functions.
Even for home entertainment, I have a smartphone, I have a tablet, and I have a desktop. I use all three, however I spend most of my time on the desktop because using a real keyboard is easier than a touchscreen whose keyboard takes up half the view, I have a much larger screen so I can do more than one thing at a time, and I like to game so the precision of a good mouse is important to me.
Their are native application platforms that are easy to distribute. Flash and Silverlight are 99% as easy to distribute/update as html/js apps (at least to desktop boxes).
The GP, if he/she is like every single other Libertarian I've discussed this with, is convinced that poor people are poor because they don't work hard, and government assistance programs are literally stealing from the wealthy to "fund the whims" of the poor, who are poor due to their laziness. These people believe that taxing the rich to assist the poor will just make the poor more lazy as they don't have to work hard anymore, and is therefore counterproductive. They also believe that taking money from the rich to give services to the poor is counterproductive because of the the point in my previous sentence, but also because the rich can put that money to better use (hiring people for example, or investing). In my experience the opposite is true. The poor tend to spend their money on necessities at the most competitive prices possible, directly injecting the money into the economy in a very capitalistic way, whereas the rich tend to save the money (not spend it) or spend it on $5000 watches, $80,000 foreign SUVs, traveling around the world throwing the money away, etc...conspicuous consumption which is not healthy for the economy.
You think that poor people are unproductive and rich people are productive, I'm guessing. If you're ever in the Santa Barbara area, take a stroll through Montecito on a workday afternoon and count the number of people either at the country club, drinking martinis at one of the many expensive restaurants, or just "out for a drive". Now go into one of those country clubs or restaurants and tell me who is actually doing the work. Come back to me and tell me who are the unproductive members of society again.
Linq is Language INtegrated Query. It is used to query anything that implements an interface called IEnumerable, which is basically anything that is a list. It can be used to query all kinds of things outside of database tables (although it is pretty decent at that).
A parable about how a girl succeeds more because she has the advantage of inherited money?
Please tell me this isn't meant to make Republicans look good, because it doesn't...
If you don't enjoy your job, find something else you are passionate about and do that professionally. Yes, you should have a life outside of work...but you need to be passionate enough to not bitch and moan about having to work 60 hour weeks. You have to love it, or you don't belong there to begin with.
I'm an American living in Rotterdam (Holland) right now. I literally can take the tram or subway or bus to within a block of anywhere I want to go in the city 90% of the time. For the other 10% I can ride a bike (for which there is an amazing bike infrastructure that is world renowned). Driving is a last resort thing to do here, and you only consider doing it if you don't live in the city/town/whatever you need to go to. In these situations it is still an option to take the trains, although this can be worse than a car in some cases because of multiple connections. This system works very well, and I don't miss my "I need to drive everywhere I go!" American way of life at all!
Ok, so what if you simply drive up, take your battery out, throw it in a charging station, take a charged battery from someone who was there 5 hours ago and put it in your car and drive away?
Doesn't seem like the hardest problem in the world to solve!
Ok, so what makes child pornography different than "beating up"-ography is that the chain of fault I talked about doesn't really exist for other crimes like beating someone up. So, the presence of the chain-of-fault-all-the-way-to-the-crime is what leads to child pornography being illegal. That seems like a stretch to me, because there are many things that I can do that are stupid but are likely to lead to a crime. For example, I can take a $20 out of my pocket and place it on my car seat with the car door unlocked. This is likely to lead to a crime of theft, so shouldn't what I did be illegal? In fact, people do stupid things like this all the time, leaving their keys in their car, walking down a dark alley in a known mugging area, etc...but being stupid in these ways is not illegal, but acting in these ways is likely to lead to a crime.
I have a question for any legal scholars. First, I have a gut feeling that possession of child pornography is wrong, but what is the rationale for why it is illegal to possess? Is it that the possession implies that the possessor bought it and therefore is driving demand for it? If so, the creation for demand of it has to be considered wrong, which once again I understand at a gut level, but why is it illegal? Maybe the answer to this is that the demand for the material causes actual abuse of children to occur in order to produce the material. Ok, so the root of this is that the demand causes abuse, which is clearly a violation of the rights of a child, and therefore the demand causes the abuse which itself is indicated by possession of the offending material.
If my logical train of thought here is correct, why isn't it also illegal to possess a picture (or movie or book etc) of any criminal act? For example, say I had a picture of someone being beaten up. Also say that this picture had no artistic or political value. Possession of this (using the above reasoning) implies that I have created demand for the picture. The demand for the picture (thanks to Adam Smith) causes the creation of the picture, which leads to the actual beating up of someone.
Why isn't any media (that has no political or artistic value) depicting a crime considered illegal?
I only use AdBlock to filter out annoying ads. You know, the ones that have animation and/or sound. These ones make it really hard for me to read the content of the website....its like trying to read a newspaper while a clown is dancing right next to it. Normal, text based ads are fine...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, you clearly missed the point.
If I got shopping for a car because having a car will save me $10,000 a year, and only find cars on sale for $20,000, then I'm not going to buy a car.
My company is looking for experienced developers in the Denver area without much luck. They may be out there but they seem to be behind a wall of recruiters or otherwise unavailable due to not wanting to jump from their current jobs. I think the unemployment rate for .net developers here is something like 2%.
Yes, we need more. A common Slashdot response is that the employers aren't paying enough to attract the talent. Well, if the talent isn't worth the money in terms of bang for buck for the company, then I guess that's that, employer doesn't get a new employee and the employee doesn't get the job. Its unfortunate for both sides at that point, the economics just don't add up.
I have no answer. I wanted to comment that this is the most pertinent "Ask Slashdot" that I've seen in the last five years. I would guess any router who's firmware was open-sourced.
We are halfway through the process? In the office where I sit, approximately 100% of the applications used by our staff are thick client. Nobody uses web apps because they are slow and have poor user experiences compared to thick client native apps.
Windows Metro is not HTML5 based.
HTML+Javascript is one of the languages that can talk to the underlying OS. So can C++. So can C#, So can VB.NET.
The author apparently doesn't know that Metro *IS* a fat client.
Looks like a map of red/blue states. Just sayin'.
Einstein didn't believe in a deity. He believed in the god of Spinoza, which is just a metaphor for the whole of nature.
How can tablets/phones/whatever replace the desire for a screen bigger than 10" and/or a real keyboard designed for typing and/or a real mouse designed for precision?
Sure, I believe for consuming media content "on the train" and a small fraction of business purposes, a touchscreen is sufficient and arguably better than a desktop, but I cannot see a future where these small touchscreens can replace the vast majority of business purposes which require lots of user input and accurate cursor control on a screen big enough to do multitasking functions.
Even for home entertainment, I have a smartphone, I have a tablet, and I have a desktop. I use all three, however I spend most of my time on the desktop because using a real keyboard is easier than a touchscreen whose keyboard takes up half the view, I have a much larger screen so I can do more than one thing at a time, and I like to game so the precision of a good mouse is important to me.
Their are native application platforms that are easy to distribute. Flash and Silverlight are 99% as easy to distribute/update as html/js apps (at least to desktop boxes).
Visual Studio 2010 and 2011 were both written in C# and WPF.
The GP, if he/she is like every single other Libertarian I've discussed this with, is convinced that poor people are poor because they don't work hard, and government assistance programs are literally stealing from the wealthy to "fund the whims" of the poor, who are poor due to their laziness. These people believe that taxing the rich to assist the poor will just make the poor more lazy as they don't have to work hard anymore, and is therefore counterproductive. They also believe that taking money from the rich to give services to the poor is counterproductive because of the the point in my previous sentence, but also because the rich can put that money to better use (hiring people for example, or investing). In my experience the opposite is true. The poor tend to spend their money on necessities at the most competitive prices possible, directly injecting the money into the economy in a very capitalistic way, whereas the rich tend to save the money (not spend it) or spend it on $5000 watches, $80,000 foreign SUVs, traveling around the world throwing the money away, etc...conspicuous consumption which is not healthy for the economy.
You think that poor people are unproductive and rich people are productive, I'm guessing. If you're ever in the Santa Barbara area, take a stroll through Montecito on a workday afternoon and count the number of people either at the country club, drinking martinis at one of the many expensive restaurants, or just "out for a drive". Now go into one of those country clubs or restaurants and tell me who is actually doing the work. Come back to me and tell me who are the unproductive members of society again.
Let it go to jury... No way a jury would convict her. Doesn't matter if she technically broke the law.
My toothbrush can do this and has been able to for quite a few years...
Linq is Language INtegrated Query. It is used to query anything that implements an interface called IEnumerable, which is basically anything that is a list. It can be used to query all kinds of things outside of database tables (although it is pretty decent at that).
A parable about how a girl succeeds more because she has the advantage of inherited money? Please tell me this isn't meant to make Republicans look good, because it doesn't...
Whenever I want to work remotely, I just remote desktop into my work computer. It works fine...why do I need a web-based IDE?
If you don't enjoy your job, find something else you are passionate about and do that professionally. Yes, you should have a life outside of work...but you need to be passionate enough to not bitch and moan about having to work 60 hour weeks. You have to love it, or you don't belong there to begin with.
I'm an American living in Rotterdam (Holland) right now. I literally can take the tram or subway or bus to within a block of anywhere I want to go in the city 90% of the time. For the other 10% I can ride a bike (for which there is an amazing bike infrastructure that is world renowned). Driving is a last resort thing to do here, and you only consider doing it if you don't live in the city/town/whatever you need to go to. In these situations it is still an option to take the trains, although this can be worse than a car in some cases because of multiple connections. This system works very well, and I don't miss my "I need to drive everywhere I go!" American way of life at all!
Ok, so what if you simply drive up, take your battery out, throw it in a charging station, take a charged battery from someone who was there 5 hours ago and put it in your car and drive away? Doesn't seem like the hardest problem in the world to solve!
Ok, so what makes child pornography different than "beating up"-ography is that the chain of fault I talked about doesn't really exist for other crimes like beating someone up. So, the presence of the chain-of-fault-all-the-way-to-the-crime is what leads to child pornography being illegal. That seems like a stretch to me, because there are many things that I can do that are stupid but are likely to lead to a crime. For example, I can take a $20 out of my pocket and place it on my car seat with the car door unlocked. This is likely to lead to a crime of theft, so shouldn't what I did be illegal? In fact, people do stupid things like this all the time, leaving their keys in their car, walking down a dark alley in a known mugging area, etc...but being stupid in these ways is not illegal, but acting in these ways is likely to lead to a crime.
I have a question for any legal scholars. First, I have a gut feeling that possession of child pornography is wrong, but what is the rationale for why it is illegal to possess? Is it that the possession implies that the possessor bought it and therefore is driving demand for it? If so, the creation for demand of it has to be considered wrong, which once again I understand at a gut level, but why is it illegal? Maybe the answer to this is that the demand for the material causes actual abuse of children to occur in order to produce the material. Ok, so the root of this is that the demand causes abuse, which is clearly a violation of the rights of a child, and therefore the demand causes the abuse which itself is indicated by possession of the offending material. If my logical train of thought here is correct, why isn't it also illegal to possess a picture (or movie or book etc) of any criminal act? For example, say I had a picture of someone being beaten up. Also say that this picture had no artistic or political value. Possession of this (using the above reasoning) implies that I have created demand for the picture. The demand for the picture (thanks to Adam Smith) causes the creation of the picture, which leads to the actual beating up of someone. Why isn't any media (that has no political or artistic value) depicting a crime considered illegal?
I only use AdBlock to filter out annoying ads. You know, the ones that have animation and/or sound. These ones make it really hard for me to read the content of the website....its like trying to read a newspaper while a clown is dancing right next to it. Normal, text based ads are fine...
Ok, and tell me why we had to drop it on two heaviliy populated cities to show them that we had the power?