Absolutely, a 16hr coding day can be productive, but you better be damn sure the coder has the day off afterwards, and possibly even beforehand.
I have never seen a coder get a day off after a 16 hour day.
I have worked 36 hours shifts at my current company probably a dozen times. Once you do the first 24 hours to get something out the door, you are going to need another 12 hours or so to fix all the bugs caused by coding under pressure and beyond reasonable expectations.
Bangalore is a little tougher, but they could still do 10PM central US, 8:30AM Bangalore. Is google so inflexible that they refuse to reschedule a meeting to be more convenient for everyone involved?
It confounds me at times when dealing with our India keying companies, that they seem to want us to meet at crazy hours of the night so as not to inconvenience their workers. Hey, you want to take our jobs, then you have to make the sacrifice and be available the hours we work in the U.S.
Assuming the reader intends to read them again in the future: I keep rather few books on the bookshelf, the rest get put up for resale or donated to the library after I'm done with them.
I have read most of the books in my collection two or more times. I'm always trotting out older ones I haven't read in a while and rereading them. At least with paper you have the resale/gifting option, with eBooks you're stuck with them thanks to DRM and they're not even cheaper than paperbacks either!
That's not true. You're only stuck with them until the DRM server goes tits up. Then all your books are gone.
I will likely never have $2,000,000 in the bank. That is how much coverage I have for my car insurance
The only time an accident is likely to cause you to have to shell out $2 million is if the found out that you had $2 million in the bank or that you had $2 million worth of insurance, otherwise, you would likely have to just pay the actual cost of an accident, which even for a bad accident is unlikely to be more than $50,000.
The largest payout that I was able to google was one in Canada of $17 million dollars, but this was because the delivery truck company had a $20 million insurance policy. If they did not have that much, then the settlement would likely have been much lower. In fact, the high dollar insurance policy was really a liability, as the lawyer and the family that sued probably would not have gone to such lengths and paid so many legal fees to try to obtain the money if there had been less money to get. The really outrageous thing is that the delivery truck driver was not at fault. The teenage driver of a Honda ran a red light and got hit by the truck, but the truck company was forced to pay $17 million because the boy tried to auto-darwinate himself. Such is our legal system.
Since $30,000 is not enough to cover any medical bills for a serious car accident
Well, it probably would be if the doctor's would charge what they would actually get paid by an insurance company.
Driving without insurance means you will not be able to pay for damage you cause.
Unless you are rich or unless you save up the money you otherwise would have paid to an insurance company and put it in an interest bearing account. If everybody did this, on average, they would save money, because they are not paying the insurance company profit. What sucks is that when you most need that money is generally early on when you are a sucky (and also usually cocky) driver, and you haven't saved up much money yet.
imagine for a moment that everybody just stopped buying insurance, cancelled their insurance completely and drove without it.
If everyone drove without insurance, then the people that cause accidents would be forced to pay money to the people that they run into while people who drive safely would go scott free. The insurance system we have in place insures that good drivers share some of the burden that bad drivers would have to shoulder all by themselves (plus a healthy profit for the insurer, of course). What are you, some sort of anti-socialist?
There was no government regulation involved when the banks fucked up the economy.
Sure there was. In fact, it was the government requiring a certain percentage of loans be made in areas that historically default on mortgages that helped fuel the mortgage crisis.
I must be really old, because I used to pay $14 per month to Bell period. End of story. As in, the whole phone bill including long distance and local toll charges and all applicable fees and taxes. And if you didn't want you number listed, you told them not to list your number. Of course, this was back in the late 70's and early 80's. Now, with all of our modern technology and efficiency, I'm sure that we all pay much less than that.
Absolutely barmy. In my case, wanting to add a camper van (a small thing in the UK, not one of those those giant motorhomes) would have put my car insurance bill up from about £200 (I can't remember exact figures) up to about £900. It is hardly as if my second vehicle was a sports car and I was revealing a Walter Mitty tendency.
Even more bizarrely, here in the U.S., an RV is generally a totally different policy (even the behemoth ones) and they are generally pretty cheap to insure compared to a care. If it wasn't for the gas guzzler nature, I would drive mine to work and get rid of the car. My car costs me $200 a month to insure. The RV costs me around $50 a month. Ironically, the RV is worth 15 times more than the car.
Very, *very* few SUVs are being used to do something that couldn't be done equally well (if not better) in a smaller vehicle.
SUVs are just stupid design anyway. The acronym stands for Sport Utility Vehicle, and it definitely applies. You get all the sportiness and handling of a truck, and the Utility and comfort of a sports car.
insurance for two vehicles for one driver can actually be cheaper then having one insured, have you shopped around?Insurance for two vehicles with one driver is definitely less than double of one vehicle, but it is far more than just a single vehicle. Insurance is a scam. The biggest portion of insurance is liability, and yet, even for one driver, and two vehicles, you have to maintain liability at all times, or spend a lot of time dropping and re-adding and convincing the insurance company that it is not drivable and signing affidavits and whatnot. Unfortunately, once the fed made liability insurance mandatory, the costs of insurance skyrocketed. It is a government protected required fee so they can charge whatever they want and your only choice is not to drive.
Most of the people in your situation does those things so seldom that it would be cheaper for them to own a smaller vehicle and rent a larger vehicle when they need to do work that requires a truck or if they need to carry more than 3 passengers.
But 90% or more of what car companies rent out is small to midsize cars. And with the prices they charge for larger vehicles, it makes more sense to just own a larger vehicle.
Maybe grandma and grandpa need a larger vehicle only seldom, but most anybody that owns a home will probable end up needing a larger vehicle a few times a month. I happen to own a work truck, but I also own a midsize sedan, so I only drive the truck when I need it. That tends to be about twice a week.
I wonder if they did a sample from a toe and a sample from the head if they would come up with different genetics. My assumption would be that there would be slight differences.
I get what Microsoft is trying to do - they're trying to unify the interfaces so that the tablet experience mirrors the desktop experience.
That's a wonderful idea. Of course, as you seem to be aware, the desktop experience is fast and efficient, while tablet experience is slow and inefficient. So, rather than work on something hard, like making the tablet experience faster and more efficient, like the desktop, they have decided to use the lowest common denominator and make all of their platforms slow and inefficient. Congratulations, Microsoft! I will not be anxiously awaiting Windows 8 and Windows Vista can hang out together under my "Do Not Install Under Penalty of Death" collection.
With 300,000 miles without "a single accident under computer control." it has a collision avoidance algorithm that is far better than yours. Therefore it would make sense that you wouldn't be allowed to manually override a far superior driver.
Just as an airplane is designed to be able to fly itself in most situations that we have seen and some that we have only imagined, we still cannot program an airplane to figure out what to do in a situation which it isn't programmed for. The same applies to cars, only more so, because cars travel within four or five feet laterally from each other, and there are many millions more of them then there are airplanes. An airplane pilot is specially trained to be able to handle the situations that the plane cannot handle by itself. I fear that with cars, if we have automatic driving, rather than be more rigorously trained for special situations, drivers will be less adequately trained because "the computer will handle everything".
That's what I don't get about the US word 'math' - like the UK word 'maths', it is short for 'mathematics', which is a plural. Conventionally, plurals end in 's'. Therefore, by convention, 'maths' is the correct abbreviation.
Yes, just as 'gyms' is the proper abbreviation for 'gymnastics'.
Has anyone ever used the term "Eastern Seaboard" outside of the movies? It gets under my skin, the cliche use of that term in all the movies, and yet I never hear it used anywhere else.
If I could give you a definite citation I would, but I only seem to see rumors and side effects. Basically I am talking about Major Medical, and I have seen a lot of people saying that Obamacare would make Major Medical illegal even though Major Medical IS insurance and all these other plans are not insurance at all but are just health plans. I have read that 9 major companies have stopped offering major medical since Obamacare was signed.
I've decouple my healthcare from my job, but Obamacare threatens to remove my option and force me into a plan that I don't want and that just feeds more money into the insurance Fat Cats pockets.
Perhaps they should require a different subset of digits from the credit card number. The last four is a rather weak choice.
Better than the first four.
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely, a 16hr coding day can be productive, but you better be damn sure the coder has the day off afterwards, and possibly even beforehand.
I have never seen a coder get a day off after a 16 hour day.
I have worked 36 hours shifts at my current company probably a dozen times. Once you do the first 24 hours to get something out the door, you are going to need another 12 hours or so to fix all the bugs caused by coding under pressure and beyond reasonable expectations.
Bangalore is a little tougher, but they could still do 10PM central US, 8:30AM Bangalore. Is google so inflexible that they refuse to reschedule a meeting to be more convenient for everyone involved?
It confounds me at times when dealing with our India keying companies, that they seem to want us to meet at crazy hours of the night so as not to inconvenience their workers. Hey, you want to take our jobs, then you have to make the sacrifice and be available the hours we work in the U.S.
Assuming the reader intends to read them again in the future: I keep rather few books on the bookshelf, the rest get put up for resale or donated to the library after I'm done with them.
I have read most of the books in my collection two or more times. I'm always trotting out older ones I haven't read in a while and rereading them.
At least with paper you have the resale/gifting option, with eBooks you're stuck with them thanks to DRM and they're not even cheaper than paperbacks either! That's not true. You're only stuck with them until the DRM server goes tits up. Then all your books are gone.
If you have 300-400, why not buy 100 books?
I will likely never have $2,000,000 in the bank. That is how much coverage I have for my car insurance
The only time an accident is likely to cause you to have to shell out $2 million is if the found out that you had $2 million in the bank or that you had $2 million worth of insurance, otherwise, you would likely have to just pay the actual cost of an accident, which even for a bad accident is unlikely to be more than $50,000.
The largest payout that I was able to google was one in Canada of $17 million dollars, but this was because the delivery truck company had a $20 million insurance policy. If they did not have that much, then the settlement would likely have been much lower. In fact, the high dollar insurance policy was really a liability, as the lawyer and the family that sued probably would not have gone to such lengths and paid so many legal fees to try to obtain the money if there had been less money to get. The really outrageous thing is that the delivery truck driver was not at fault. The teenage driver of a Honda ran a red light and got hit by the truck, but the truck company was forced to pay $17 million because the boy tried to auto-darwinate himself. Such is our legal system.
Since $30,000 is not enough to cover any medical bills for a serious car accident
Well, it probably would be if the doctor's would charge what they would actually get paid by an insurance company.
Having insurance is already required by law. Me, I'm waiting for the ultimate in government redundancy, mandatory uninsured motorist insurance.
Driving without insurance means you will not be able to pay for damage you cause.
Unless you are rich or unless you save up the money you otherwise would have paid to an insurance company and put it in an interest bearing account. If everybody did this, on average, they would save money, because they are not paying the insurance company profit. What sucks is that when you most need that money is generally early on when you are a sucky (and also usually cocky) driver, and you haven't saved up much money yet.
imagine for a moment that everybody just stopped buying insurance, cancelled their insurance completely and drove without it.
If everyone drove without insurance, then the people that cause accidents would be forced to pay money to the people that they run into while people who drive safely would go scott free. The insurance system we have in place insures that good drivers share some of the burden that bad drivers would have to shoulder all by themselves (plus a healthy profit for the insurer, of course). What are you, some sort of anti-socialist?
There was no government regulation involved when the banks fucked up the economy.
Sure there was. In fact, it was the government requiring a certain percentage of loans be made in areas that historically default on mortgages that helped fuel the mortgage crisis.
I must be really old, because I used to pay $14 per month to Bell period. End of story. As in, the whole phone bill including long distance and local toll charges and all applicable fees and taxes. And if you didn't want you number listed, you told them not to list your number. Of course, this was back in the late 70's and early 80's. Now, with all of our modern technology and efficiency, I'm sure that we all pay much less than that.
Absolutely barmy. In my case, wanting to add a camper van (a small thing in the UK, not one of those those giant motorhomes) would have put my car insurance bill up from about £200 (I can't remember exact figures) up to about £900. It is hardly as if my second vehicle was a sports car and I was revealing a Walter Mitty tendency.
Even more bizarrely, here in the U.S., an RV is generally a totally different policy (even the behemoth ones) and they are generally pretty cheap to insure compared to a care. If it wasn't for the gas guzzler nature, I would drive mine to work and get rid of the car. My car costs me $200 a month to insure. The RV costs me around $50 a month. Ironically, the RV is worth 15 times more than the car.
I'm not worried about dying from my own suicide. I can control that. I'm worried about dying from somebody elses suicide.
Very, *very* few SUVs are being used to do something that couldn't be done equally well (if not better) in a smaller vehicle.
SUVs are just stupid design anyway. The acronym stands for Sport Utility Vehicle, and it definitely applies. You get all the sportiness and handling of a truck, and the Utility and comfort of a sports car.
insurance for two vehicles for one driver can actually be cheaper then having one insured, have you shopped around?Insurance for two vehicles with one driver is definitely less than double of one vehicle, but it is far more than just a single vehicle. Insurance is a scam. The biggest portion of insurance is liability, and yet, even for one driver, and two vehicles, you have to maintain liability at all times, or spend a lot of time dropping and re-adding and convincing the insurance company that it is not drivable and signing affidavits and whatnot. Unfortunately, once the fed made liability insurance mandatory, the costs of insurance skyrocketed. It is a government protected required fee so they can charge whatever they want and your only choice is not to drive.
Most of the people in your situation does those things so seldom that it would be cheaper for them to own a smaller vehicle and rent a larger vehicle when they need to do work that requires a truck or if they need to carry more than 3 passengers.
But 90% or more of what car companies rent out is small to midsize cars. And with the prices they charge for larger vehicles, it makes more sense to just own a larger vehicle.
Maybe grandma and grandpa need a larger vehicle only seldom, but most anybody that owns a home will probable end up needing a larger vehicle a few times a month. I happen to own a work truck, but I also own a midsize sedan, so I only drive the truck when I need it. That tends to be about twice a week.
I wonder if they did a sample from a toe and a sample from the head if they would come up with different genetics. My assumption would be that there would be slight differences.
I'm curious about how the exodus will happen. I don't see it going to G+, really.
Perhaps people will go out and make real friends.
I get what Microsoft is trying to do - they're trying to unify the interfaces so that the tablet experience mirrors the desktop experience.
That's a wonderful idea. Of course, as you seem to be aware, the desktop experience is fast and efficient, while tablet experience is slow and inefficient. So, rather than work on something hard, like making the tablet experience faster and more efficient, like the desktop, they have decided to use the lowest common denominator and make all of their platforms slow and inefficient. Congratulations, Microsoft! I will not be anxiously awaiting Windows 8 and Windows Vista can hang out together under my "Do Not Install Under Penalty of Death" collection.
With 300,000 miles without "a single accident under computer control." it has a collision avoidance algorithm that is far better than yours. Therefore it would make sense that you wouldn't be allowed to manually override a far superior driver.
Just as an airplane is designed to be able to fly itself in most situations that we have seen and some that we have only imagined, we still cannot program an airplane to figure out what to do in a situation which it isn't programmed for. The same applies to cars, only more so, because cars travel within four or five feet laterally from each other, and there are many millions more of them then there are airplanes. An airplane pilot is specially trained to be able to handle the situations that the plane cannot handle by itself. I fear that with cars, if we have automatic driving, rather than be more rigorously trained for special situations, drivers will be less adequately trained because "the computer will handle everything".
That's what I don't get about the US word 'math' - like the UK word 'maths', it is short for 'mathematics', which is a plural. Conventionally, plurals end in 's'. Therefore, by convention, 'maths' is the correct abbreviation.
Yes, just as 'gyms' is the proper abbreviation for 'gymnastics'.
Has anyone ever used the term "Eastern Seaboard" outside of the movies? It gets under my skin, the cliche use of that term in all the movies, and yet I never hear it used anywhere else.
If I could give you a definite citation I would, but I only seem to see rumors and side effects. Basically I am talking about Major Medical, and I have seen a lot of people saying that Obamacare would make Major Medical illegal even though Major Medical IS insurance and all these other plans are not insurance at all but are just health plans. I have read that 9 major companies have stopped offering major medical since Obamacare was signed.
I've decouple my healthcare from my job, but Obamacare threatens to remove my option and force me into a plan that I don't want and that just feeds more money into the insurance Fat Cats pockets.
Perhaps they should require a different subset of digits from the credit card number. The last four is a rather weak choice.
Better than the first four.