The corollary to what you said about not paying a recruiting company is that if you have a recruiter that charges you to find you a job, they are unethical and should be avoided like the plague. The employer pays the recruiter, not the employee.
All the emoticons typed since the internet began won't change the fact that this is, in fact, what you do. Your company is engaging in scummy behavior and you're defending it with a shrug off "It sucks when things don't go right."
Oh, I just quoted you. Maybe you can come after slashdot for the ad revenue whenever someone reads my post.
" Serenity was never meant to be Oscar material, or even a movie for people who've never seen Firefly to watch."
I agree on the first point, but I don't know about your second point. I know several people who saw Serenity not even knowing at the time it was based on a TV show, and who liked it quite a bit. They appreciated it as a science fiction movie that was a little bit different. In one case I got to tell one of them that it was based on a TV show and gave her my DVDs to watch, and thus created another browncoat.:-)
Your assumptions are correct. Voyager's velocity of 17 km/s will not appreciably change, and it will escape the sun's well, as escape velocity at its current location is about 3.85 km/s.
Relativity is insignificant at 100 times Voyager's velocity as tau at 1700 km/s is.99998, or in other words, a 1000 year trip would be shortened by about 6 days from the traveler's perspective.
The Orion and Daedalus projects of the 60s and 70s had theoretically designed spacecraft capable of anywhere from 5 to 12% of c given materials and power sources available at the time or soon available. Even then the journey is many decades and relativistic effects, though more pronounced are still not very significant (tau ~= 0.993 at 12% of c). Of course, the political and economic will to engage in such things is non-existent, so these ideas remain firmly in the realm of science fiction. I believe that Freeman Dyson computed the economic cost of an Orion class starship and concluded it would be about the same as a year's worth of the United States GDP at the time (early 70s? Don't remember). JWST has cost overruns a millionth of that amortized over nearly 20 years and was/is in danger of getting canceled.
I think that it is possible someday that we will send robotic probes to nearby star systems, and maybe manned missions to follow, but I also believe that absent some singularity-level fundamental physics breakthrough before then such things are at least a century or two away from being given any serious consideration, and the designs of those vessels will not be much like anything talked about today. As it stands, I'm not even liking the odds of seeing humans on Mars before I die (I'm 44).
I've had the 2010 Ford Fusion hybrid for just a shade over 2 years now and it is the best car I've ever owned. The only problem I've had is a nail in the sidewall of one of the tires, and that's hardly their fault. That it gets great gas mileage (40 in the winter, 35 in the summer) is just bonus.
Though I'm only 6' 1", I have the average torso length of someone who is 6' 6" (I joke that I have thumbs for legs; my wife is a foot shorter than me and her inseam is only an inch shorter than mine), so if I'm not careful, I'll bump my head in just about every car made.:-)
"Archimedes Plutonium" is a name I haven't heard in many many years. Good times. Thanks for the stroll down Memory Lane! I'll have to Google him and see if he's up to anything these days.
Has/had (don't know if it's been patched) a nifty bug where a 4-bit group identifies the state the spacecraft is supposed to be in. The problem is when the spacecraft reboots, that value starts off uninitialized, so whatever value just happens to be sitting at that point in memory gets used. Not a huge problem, because when the spacecraft reboots (it happens) we can just telecommand it to the right state. Except for one problem: One of those states is "I'm on the launching pad and shouldn't listen to any radio telecommands, but only commands from the hardwire interface." Which means we can't remotely command it out of that state anymore, and it will at that point be a dead orbiter.
True. Some car companies even market the idea that their cars retain more value on the used market to bolster the new sales, and there's truth to that. If you find two new cars you like for $25k, and all other things being equal, in three years one will sell for $10k on the used market and the other will sell for $12k, which one will you buy if it's your intention to replace it then? And now, that company with the higher resale value figures out a way to put some kind of owner-based ignition block so that you can't sell that car anymore. Now which one are you going to buy? Why people who specialize in creating games can't figure out how to play this game that the car companies have down pat is a mystery to me. Their position is made even more precarious because their industry is like the car industry, but people have a way of duplicating the car for free if doing business with them is too onerous.
I've tried that, and it doesn't seem to work quite as well as I'd hope. It doesn't help that one of my core players (and wife!) is hard of hearing, and she manages fine in-person with her hearing aids, but via video plus computer speakers makes it hard for her to comprehend the person playing remotely.
Seriously, learn a little about optics, spectroscopy, and remote sensing. Conceptually, what this guy did isn't even that hard to comprehend, though actually working the problem isn't easy at all. We certainly have ways of telling (within a confidence interval) what is going on. Is it perfect? Of course not, and I'm sure it would look different in reality. But I'd bet good money (sadly, neither you nor I will live to see ground truth) that it's fairly close.
I have GMed a lot in (holy cow) 30 years, and while I appreciate having a fundamental set of rules, I would always blithely ignore them if it helped me tell a better story. Some DMs take an adversarial role, but to me it was always an experience of shared story telling. I provide a greater framework, world, history and map building, provide some challenges with risks and rewards, and let the players fill in the detailed narrative. It keeps me improvising a lot, and it's tiring, but very rewarding. People seem to like my style, because when I call hiatus when real life gets busy, my friends/players start bugging me after a while: "Hey, when can we get back to playing that game?"
I have an over-arching fairly typical "save the world" plotline, but how to do it is a matter of debate between three major factions, (and a couple of factions that don't want it saved) and the beauty of it is I designed it so I don't know the right answer either so I can't consciously or subconsciously steer the players or give them red herrings. And if the players want to ignore the big plot, after about 25 years in this world, there's about 100 sub-plots (I have a Rubbermaid file tote full of folders for everything going on in this world) they can engage or disengage in, and many times the players come up with nifty plot hooks all on their own that are generally pretty easy to tie into the broader narrative.
It's good to let go and not control everything when you GM. And I've found that my flexibility has allowed me to transit between rule systems (OD&D, 1st to 2nd to 3.5 to Pathfinder currently) without too much difficulty. Add a bunch of creative players over the years who have added grist to my mill, and it's made it a fun pastime for almost everyone who's played in my group. And that's the primary objective: everyone should enjoy it and have a good time.
Most of my comments are about my assumptions of the inputs and outputs of the data for exactly that reason (and having no assumptions is perhaps the largest assumption you can have!). What is perfectly reasonable code at the time may be unsuitable for the class of problems the program is expected to solve later.
I am tempted to violence when I see code like this:
i++;// increment i
Well, no kidding! I don't want a developer near the code that needs that kind of help.
We pay more, but I don't have to buy a SIM card every time I go from state to state, either. I fly 3000 miles away and when I turn on my phone it still Just Works[tm] and I'm not roaming.
I do pay a LOT more than you do, however, I'm also paying for 5 phones, which comes out to about 50 a month, a LOT of it is taxes and so-called "regulatory compliance" bullshit, though.
My last smartphone I got just a week ago (Samsung Stratosphere, not top of the line, but a still respectable 4G LTE phone) was only $28. If you want the prestige phones, they do cost quite a bit more.
On balance, you *do* have it better in Europe, IMO, but I don't think it's quite as cut-and-dry as some people think.
Slashdot Mirror
The corollary to what you said about not paying a recruiting company is that if you have a recruiter that charges you to find you a job, they are unethical and should be avoided like the plague. The employer pays the recruiter, not the employee.
But Obama makes us feel better about it, so it's okay.
I think you have that backwards. Good programmers know what to write; great ones know what to steal.
Heck, I lived in an area that didn't even let you direct dial long distance until 1987 or so.
All the emoticons typed since the internet began won't change the fact that this is, in fact, what you do. Your company is engaging in scummy behavior and you're defending it with a shrug off "It sucks when things don't go right."
Oh, I just quoted you. Maybe you can come after slashdot for the ad revenue whenever someone reads my post.
" Serenity was never meant to be Oscar material, or even a movie for people who've never seen Firefly to watch."
I agree on the first point, but I don't know about your second point. I know several people who saw Serenity not even knowing at the time it was based on a TV show, and who liked it quite a bit. They appreciated it as a science fiction movie that was a little bit different. In one case I got to tell one of them that it was based on a TV show and gave her my DVDs to watch, and thus created another browncoat. :-)
Your assumptions are correct. Voyager's velocity of 17 km/s will not appreciably change, and it will escape the sun's well, as escape velocity at its current location is about 3.85 km/s.
Relativity is insignificant at 100 times Voyager's velocity as tau at 1700 km/s is .99998, or in other words, a 1000 year trip would be shortened by about 6 days from the traveler's perspective.
The Orion and Daedalus projects of the 60s and 70s had theoretically designed spacecraft capable of anywhere from 5 to 12% of c given materials and power sources available at the time or soon available. Even then the journey is many decades and relativistic effects, though more pronounced are still not very significant (tau ~= 0.993 at 12% of c). Of course, the political and economic will to engage in such things is non-existent, so these ideas remain firmly in the realm of science fiction. I believe that Freeman Dyson computed the economic cost of an Orion class starship and concluded it would be about the same as a year's worth of the United States GDP at the time (early 70s? Don't remember). JWST has cost overruns a millionth of that amortized over nearly 20 years and was/is in danger of getting canceled.
I think that it is possible someday that we will send robotic probes to nearby star systems, and maybe manned missions to follow, but I also believe that absent some singularity-level fundamental physics breakthrough before then such things are at least a century or two away from being given any serious consideration, and the designs of those vessels will not be much like anything talked about today. As it stands, I'm not even liking the odds of seeing humans on Mars before I die (I'm 44).
This is education. A big political term you should acquaint yourself with is FERPA.
I've had the 2010 Ford Fusion hybrid for just a shade over 2 years now and it is the best car I've ever owned. The only problem I've had is a nail in the sidewall of one of the tires, and that's hardly their fault. That it gets great gas mileage (40 in the winter, 35 in the summer) is just bonus.
Though I'm only 6' 1", I have the average torso length of someone who is 6' 6" (I joke that I have thumbs for legs; my wife is a foot shorter than me and her inseam is only an inch shorter than mine), so if I'm not careful, I'll bump my head in just about every car made. :-)
"Archimedes Plutonium" is a name I haven't heard in many many years. Good times. Thanks for the stroll down Memory Lane! I'll have to Google him and see if he's up to anything these days.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it, than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
Yes, that's why George W Bush resigned the presidency after the Killian documents Dan Rather and CBS released.
Many MANY companies are a Delaware corporation, even if they do no business at all in Delaware: http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-delaware-corporation.htm
The original poster is right: http://www.sco.com/worldwide/us.html
HTH.
That would be called "ADD 1 TO COBOL".
Has/had (don't know if it's been patched) a nifty bug where a 4-bit group identifies the state the spacecraft is supposed to be in. The problem is when the spacecraft reboots, that value starts off uninitialized, so whatever value just happens to be sitting at that point in memory gets used. Not a huge problem, because when the spacecraft reboots (it happens) we can just telecommand it to the right state. Except for one problem: One of those states is "I'm on the launching pad and shouldn't listen to any radio telecommands, but only commands from the hardwire interface." Which means we can't remotely command it out of that state anymore, and it will at that point be a dead orbiter.
Space software is exciting!
True. Some car companies even market the idea that their cars retain more value on the used market to bolster the new sales, and there's truth to that. If you find two new cars you like for $25k, and all other things being equal, in three years one will sell for $10k on the used market and the other will sell for $12k, which one will you buy if it's your intention to replace it then? And now, that company with the higher resale value figures out a way to put some kind of owner-based ignition block so that you can't sell that car anymore. Now which one are you going to buy? Why people who specialize in creating games can't figure out how to play this game that the car companies have down pat is a mystery to me. Their position is made even more precarious because their industry is like the car industry, but people have a way of duplicating the car for free if doing business with them is too onerous.
I have felt for years that Java is our generation's COBOL, and with Oracle in control I feel that only makes that comparison stronger.
I've tried that, and it doesn't seem to work quite as well as I'd hope. It doesn't help that one of my core players (and wife!) is hard of hearing, and she manages fine in-person with her hearing aids, but via video plus computer speakers makes it hard for her to comprehend the person playing remotely.
LOL. Probably in the next couple of weeks. You live in the Phoenix, AZ area? :-)
The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.
Seriously, learn a little about optics, spectroscopy, and remote sensing. Conceptually, what this guy did isn't even that hard to comprehend, though actually working the problem isn't easy at all. We certainly have ways of telling (within a confidence interval) what is going on. Is it perfect? Of course not, and I'm sure it would look different in reality. But I'd bet good money (sadly, neither you nor I will live to see ground truth) that it's fairly close.
I have GMed a lot in (holy cow) 30 years, and while I appreciate having a fundamental set of rules, I would always blithely ignore them if it helped me tell a better story. Some DMs take an adversarial role, but to me it was always an experience of shared story telling. I provide a greater framework, world, history and map building, provide some challenges with risks and rewards, and let the players fill in the detailed narrative. It keeps me improvising a lot, and it's tiring, but very rewarding. People seem to like my style, because when I call hiatus when real life gets busy, my friends/players start bugging me after a while: "Hey, when can we get back to playing that game?"
I have an over-arching fairly typical "save the world" plotline, but how to do it is a matter of debate between three major factions, (and a couple of factions that don't want it saved) and the beauty of it is I designed it so I don't know the right answer either so I can't consciously or subconsciously steer the players or give them red herrings. And if the players want to ignore the big plot, after about 25 years in this world, there's about 100 sub-plots (I have a Rubbermaid file tote full of folders for everything going on in this world) they can engage or disengage in, and many times the players come up with nifty plot hooks all on their own that are generally pretty easy to tie into the broader narrative.
It's good to let go and not control everything when you GM. And I've found that my flexibility has allowed me to transit between rule systems (OD&D, 1st to 2nd to 3.5 to Pathfinder currently) without too much difficulty. Add a bunch of creative players over the years who have added grist to my mill, and it's made it a fun pastime for almost everyone who's played in my group. And that's the primary objective: everyone should enjoy it and have a good time.
Or get you laid off. Just saying, that cuts both ways.
Most of my comments are about my assumptions of the inputs and outputs of the data for exactly that reason (and having no assumptions is perhaps the largest assumption you can have!). What is perfectly reasonable code at the time may be unsuitable for the class of problems the program is expected to solve later.
I am tempted to violence when I see code like this:
Well, no kidding! I don't want a developer near the code that needs that kind of help.
We pay more, but I don't have to buy a SIM card every time I go from state to state, either. I fly 3000 miles away and when I turn on my phone it still Just Works[tm] and I'm not roaming.
I do pay a LOT more than you do, however, I'm also paying for 5 phones, which comes out to about 50 a month, a LOT of it is taxes and so-called "regulatory compliance" bullshit, though.
My last smartphone I got just a week ago (Samsung Stratosphere, not top of the line, but a still respectable 4G LTE phone) was only $28. If you want the prestige phones, they do cost quite a bit more.
On balance, you *do* have it better in Europe, IMO, but I don't think it's quite as cut-and-dry as some people think.