Linus server software is a different game entirely, but on the desktop you're right - us linux users will look for the free, open source way every time.
This is because FOSS products end up being more capable, over time. Maybe not in terms of bells and whistles, but in terms of moving data between formats, supporting every possible device, data format etc etc. We've come to like the way things work on the FOSS desktop - every new capability is just an apt-get away.
"Personally all music largely dies and most people are just vainly listening to it trying to recapture lost memories. Better to let the old greed driven crap die and let new open, creative commons music take it's place."
I could not disagree more. There was great music made before I was born that is still great. There is music made now (though granted a small percentage) that will also stand the test of time. It's not all throwaway trash.
is that they aim to fly as close to the line as possible.
In a system where safety rating is part of the commercial offering, you'll end up with cheap, dangerous, low margin airlines because (and it's a shame it has to be said so often) enlightened self interest is a myth.
of course the rest of this stuff is spot on. The TSA should be disbanded.
Couldn't agree more, the whole thing is ridiculous.
I also find it offensive when politicians and newspapers in the Uk talk about building more "affordable housing" by which they mean building things as small as they can get away with, out of cheap materials, and charging what (inflation adjusted) a reasonable house would have cost a decade or so back.
Affordable housing should be about making decent housing affordable, not cramming in tiny, cheap boxes wherever you can shove them.
Lack of space is one of the reasons I left. Perth is no cheaper than London for the average house, but the average house is about three times the size!
I only left last year, so it probably hasn't changed a lot in the last 15 months, I'm guessing.
I wouldn't necessarily argue for building upwards to accommodate more people, I would be much more in favour of building upwards to give people more space.
Not that I'd be completely decided each way, but I'm sure there are enough crappy areas in the city that nobody would miss:)
I lived in London for a decade and don't remember being asked about that...
One problem with London of course is the land, which is not really conducive to skyscrapers. But the things is that instead of building upwards, the property owners of London have spent the last couple of decades subdividing. Properties in London are now absolutely tiny. I never bought property there because the huge price you paid in return for no space whatsoever just didn't seem worth it. Of course from an investment perspective I should have just bought anything I could and waited for it to triple in value...
Exactly. That's why we need to allow people to swat others when someone believes that another person is doing something "wrong."
Did you miss my sarcasm or did I miss yours?
"What are the "best outcomes for society"? That sounds awfully subjective to me."
Well that's something that should be decided, by society.
Are we aiming to punish criminals because that feels right, or are we aiming for the lowest possible crime rate?
These two things are different and should be approached differently. I don't believe that bringing vengeance into the equation helps. Thinking back to your earlier post - a swat on the hand to a kid that's transgressing is not vengefully motivated anyway, so I was probably wrong to criticise you for it.
I just think that when we're looking at how we treat our criminals, we should take the ideas of punishment and revenge out of the equation. Incarceration is probably still the right tool, and I'm certainly not saying the judge was wrong in this case.
And we all know that you scheme works perfectly with all humans, regardless of developmental stage.
This is exactly my point - people are making judgements based on anecdotes and what they feel is right, not on any hard data as to the best outcomes for society.
"When you are suggesting we try a system which no society in the entire history of human civilization has attempted, much less succeeded with, then the onus is on you to provide the supporting evidence. So please, give us your evidence that society could function with a justice system that, in your own words, "is not punitive".
Yeah, I'll do that when you get back to me telling me exactly where I made a suggestion as to what the perfect system is, or that we actually try anything.
Or you could keep being smug that because your idea is fresh and radical, it must be good."
What's this idea of mine you talk about? You might want to work on your reading comprehension before running off at the mouth.
I said that society would never be happy with a non-punitive system regardless of evidence. You're proving nicely that any discussion that even mentions this topic will be shouted down by mouth breathers.
You have decided, absent any supporting evidence, that punishment is necessary and right.
I'm not making the assertion that it's wrong, I'm saying that the best possible outcome for society, whatever that may be, is not even investigated because of this attitude.
But this is just, right and proper! Obviously if someone does something bad, we do sometyhing bad to them and they will learn! they just will!
They won't resent society for doing these things to them, and if they do they are clearly immature and wrong, so they need to be punished even more! Why would you even question the sense of this policy?
I can see why people think this way. The fact is it's not helpful, but that won't change anything. Prison and other measures are seen as punishment, and people will never be happy with a penal system that is not punitive. it doesn't matter what's most cost effective for society, what has the best outcomes, what stops recidivism, any of that. Human nature says transgressors must be punished.
Call me rash if you like but unless it was made damn clear that weekend work was both required only for a couple of weeks and going to be well reflected when it came to payrise/bonus time, I'd be interviewing somewhere else within a week.
I'd stop short of saying "you can shove your weekends up your arse", but if the interviewing didn't work out I'd be leaving anyway after a month or so. There's more to life than work, much more. I'm glad I've always worked for people that appreciate that.
If you are in 'crunch' mode all the time then it's a sign of bad management. If it gets really bad then it's probably a sign that the company is on its way to failure. Or it could be they just don't care about their employees.
I'd say "Get the hell out, now", but I recognise that there aren't always more jobs around for the taking whenever you feel like. I would seriously be considering a career change if your average working week is more than about 45 hours and there's no other programming work around. I don't know what I'd change to mind!
(Note: I said that *I* would be considering a career change, other people have other priorities. Hell, some even get paid overtime.)
Oh sure, a friend of mine started out there and reported much the same as TFA, which is why he left for more sensible parts of the industry. But the OP said "software industry", not "games industry" which is what my reply was about.
I've had a pretty reasonable software career so far. 10 years, decent money (nothing spectracular, but decent) and outside of about two months of actual, genuine, crunchtime in there I've never worked more than 38-40 hours a week. Often less!
There are some parts of the industry that are not managed by psychopaths, or permanently in OMG PANIC mode.
It's quite refreshing to go to a language where (as someone with a lot of experience in programming but not much with python) with such flexible syntax that "I wonder if I can write it this way?" usually works.
And as for rapid prototyping it's great. A couple of evenings and 500 or so lines of python and I can have something that would take me weeks in C. Of course in C I would have had more fine grained control over behaviour and I do run up against barriers in python every so often.
The major downside for me is the GIL. For anything processor intensive you have to work around the language to use the resources of a modern system, rather than work with the language.
Slashdot Mirror
In some ways yes - Quake, OpenTyrian and various others now run on many, many more platforms and architectures than the originals did.
They're not very up to date, it's true.
Yup.
Linus server software is a different game entirely, but on the desktop you're right - us linux users will look for the free, open source way every time.
This is because FOSS products end up being more capable, over time. Maybe not in terms of bells and whistles, but in terms of moving data between formats, supporting every possible device, data format etc etc. We've come to like the way things work on the FOSS desktop - every new capability is just an apt-get away.
"Personally all music largely dies and most people are just vainly listening to it trying to recapture lost memories. Better to let the old greed driven crap die and let new open, creative commons music take it's place."
I could not disagree more. There was great music made before I was born that is still great. There is music made now (though granted a small percentage) that will also stand the test of time. It's not all throwaway trash.
This is true, though I don't know anybody up North, and there are lots of weird accents. So to be honest it's not that different to Australia!
is that they aim to fly as close to the line as possible.
In a system where safety rating is part of the commercial offering, you'll end up with cheap, dangerous, low margin airlines because (and it's a shame it has to be said so often) enlightened self interest is a myth.
of course the rest of this stuff is spot on. The TSA should be disbanded.
Couldn't agree more, the whole thing is ridiculous.
I also find it offensive when politicians and newspapers in the Uk talk about building more "affordable housing" by which they mean building things as small as they can get away with, out of cheap materials, and charging what (inflation adjusted) a reasonable house would have cost a decade or so back.
Affordable housing should be about making decent housing affordable, not cramming in tiny, cheap boxes wherever you can shove them.
Lack of space is one of the reasons I left. Perth is no cheaper than London for the average house, but the average house is about three times the size!
I only left last year, so it probably hasn't changed a lot in the last 15 months, I'm guessing.
I wouldn't necessarily argue for building upwards to accommodate more people, I would be much more in favour of building upwards to give people more space.
Not that I'd be completely decided each way, but I'm sure there are enough crappy areas in the city that nobody would miss :)
I lived in London for a decade and don't remember being asked about that...
One problem with London of course is the land, which is not really conducive to skyscrapers. But the things is that instead of building upwards, the property owners of London have spent the last couple of decades subdividing. Properties in London are now absolutely tiny. I never bought property there because the huge price you paid in return for no space whatsoever just didn't seem worth it. Of course from an investment perspective I should have just bought anything I could and waited for it to triple in value...
Well, unless the currency undergoes something of a collapse (a glut of btc on the market is very possible).
In which case I apologise!
I was, I must admit, feeling slightly trollish earlier today.
Exactly. That's why we need to allow people to swat others when someone believes that another person is doing something "wrong."
Did you miss my sarcasm or did I miss yours?
"What are the "best outcomes for society"? That sounds awfully subjective to me."
Well that's something that should be decided, by society.
Are we aiming to punish criminals because that feels right, or are we aiming for the lowest possible crime rate?
These two things are different and should be approached differently. I don't believe that bringing vengeance into the equation helps. Thinking back to your earlier post - a swat on the hand to a kid that's transgressing is not vengefully motivated anyway, so I was probably wrong to criticise you for it.
I just think that when we're looking at how we treat our criminals, we should take the ideas of punishment and revenge out of the equation. Incarceration is probably still the right tool, and I'm certainly not saying the judge was wrong in this case.
Just because it's also animal nature doesn't mean it's not human nature.
And we all know that you scheme works perfectly with all humans, regardless of developmental stage.
This is exactly my point - people are making judgements based on anecdotes and what they feel is right, not on any hard data as to the best outcomes for society.
"When you are suggesting we try a system which no society in the entire history of human civilization has attempted, much less succeeded with, then the onus is on you to provide the supporting evidence. So please, give us your evidence that society could function with a justice system that, in your own words, "is not punitive".
Yeah, I'll do that when you get back to me telling me exactly where I made a suggestion as to what the perfect system is, or that we actually try anything.
Or you could keep being smug that because your idea is fresh and radical, it must be good."
What's this idea of mine you talk about? You might want to work on your reading comprehension before running off at the mouth.
I said that society would never be happy with a non-punitive system regardless of evidence. You're proving nicely that any discussion that even mentions this topic will be shouted down by mouth breathers.
Your post brilliantly emphasises my point.
You have decided, absent any supporting evidence, that punishment is necessary and right.
I'm not making the assertion that it's wrong, I'm saying that the best possible outcome for society, whatever that may be, is not even investigated because of this attitude.
But this is just, right and proper! Obviously if someone does something bad, we do sometyhing bad to them and they will learn! they just will!
They won't resent society for doing these things to them, and if they do they are clearly immature and wrong, so they need to be punished even more! Why would you even question the sense of this policy?
I can see why people think this way. The fact is it's not helpful, but that won't change anything. Prison and other measures are seen as punishment, and people will never be happy with a penal system that is not punitive. it doesn't matter what's most cost effective for society, what has the best outcomes, what stops recidivism, any of that. Human nature says transgressors must be punished.
Call me rash if you like but unless it was made damn clear that weekend work was both required only for a couple of weeks and going to be well reflected when it came to payrise/bonus time, I'd be interviewing somewhere else within a week.
I'd stop short of saying "you can shove your weekends up your arse", but if the interviewing didn't work out I'd be leaving anyway after a month or so. There's more to life than work, much more. I'm glad I've always worked for people that appreciate that.
It's a shame when that stuff happens.
If you are in 'crunch' mode all the time then it's a sign of bad management. If it gets really bad then it's probably a sign that the company is on its way to failure. Or it could be they just don't care about their employees.
I'd say "Get the hell out, now", but I recognise that there aren't always more jobs around for the taking whenever you feel like. I would seriously be considering a career change if your average working week is more than about 45 hours and there's no other programming work around. I don't know what I'd change to mind!
(Note: I said that *I* would be considering a career change, other people have other priorities. Hell, some even get paid overtime.)
Oh sure, a friend of mine started out there and reported much the same as TFA, which is why he left for more sensible parts of the industry. But the OP said "software industry", not "games industry" which is what my reply was about.
Yes, you're probably right, I ought to take the time to learn that interface next time.
At that point in my last project (yet another fractal browser) I switched to C++ and OpenGL/CL...
You're doing it wrong.
I've had a pretty reasonable software career so far. 10 years, decent money (nothing spectracular, but decent) and outside of about two months of actual, genuine, crunchtime in there I've never worked more than 38-40 hours a week. Often less!
There are some parts of the industry that are not managed by psychopaths, or permanently in OMG PANIC mode.
You're an idiot and should be fired.
You don't post company info on third party sites, end of story. Oh, and there's no such thing as too small for source control.
I have probably just been trolled.
Python's good.
It's quite refreshing to go to a language where (as someone with a lot of experience in programming but not much with python) with such flexible syntax that "I wonder if I can write it this way?" usually works.
And as for rapid prototyping it's great. A couple of evenings and 500 or so lines of python and I can have something that would take me weeks in C. Of course in C I would have had more fine grained control over behaviour and I do run up against barriers in python every so often.
The major downside for me is the GIL. For anything processor intensive you have to work around the language to use the resources of a modern system, rather than work with the language.
Or even just using the big, free programmers handbook for any language you can think of - Google.
Really?
I was pretty sure there was some NPDRM related stuff in the PS3 that had never been replicated.
Even so, I don't really disagree with you, but I also have no idea what the culture at facebook is like.