Could you imagine if, say, aerospace engineers didn't document their work?
I think it's a poor simile. Software developers for most projects are asked to make revisions at a pace far faster than those for airplanes. This leads to various shortcuts. If documentation and testing were really that important for software, then the pace of new development would go way down and/or the # of person-hours involved in each change would go way up.
Perhaps a better simile would be what happens with mission-critical software. I suspect (but don't know) that the documentation is a lot better.
Those are preparing to be lawyers, not judges or prosecutors.
I thought that even civil and defense lawyers are considered officers of the court.
I also think that even they are given certain powers not available to regular citizens, such as issuing subpoenas. I thought that was one of the reasons for requiring even them to be of good character.
Same thing for me. I'm naturally biased against paying exorbitant prices for papers that the publisher received for free. So for my PhD work I basically avoided using papers that were only available by paying ACM, IEEE, or Elsevier.
Fortunately, in the age of CiteSeer, Google Scholar, and authors who publish their own papers even if they've submitted them to journals, I was able to boycott those publishers and still get my PhD done. Also, having a good team of technical librarians goes a long way.
5-10 years ago though, I'm not sure I could have so easily avoided paying money to those publishers.
Yeah, same for me. The ACM journals IEEE Transactions were really useful reading while I was working on my Master's. By the time I got to my PhD work though, the combination of Google Scholar, CiteSeer, and papers being available over the internet (probably in contravention to author's agreements with the journals that published the paper) made ACM and IEEE irrelevant.
It seems to me that the only part of ACM's publication system that's still relevant is the selection and vetting of good papers for their journals. So maybe they should just continue that editorial process, and periodically publish those papers as PDF's on their website. Heck, I bet Google or Amazon or MIT would host that for free.
I think that would test whether or not ACM is focused more on advancing computing as a science vs. maintaining its own bureaucracy.
I thought he was arguing against HB1 visas that import foreign workers instead of trying to hire more diverse American workers.
That's my best guess too. What if those workers are black? Or black and from impoverished countries? I'm curious if a liberal Democrat can bring himself to say "Americans first."
Of Google’s technical staff, 60 percent are white, 1 percent are black, 2 percent are Hispanic, 34 percent are Asian and 3 percent are of two or more races.
I'm confused... is Jackson arguing for more Americans, or more black people, or more black Americans, to get tech jobs?
After listening to Jackson over the years, it's now almost a reflex for me to argue against his statements. But I'm still sketchy on what they are in this case.
Yes, he uses harsh language at times, but who the fuck doesn't.
Let's look at two ways someone might respond to your viewpoint:
(1) How could a stupid cunt like you even bother posting such a moronic comment? Seriously, go die in a fire and I hope your kids get leukemia. Only someone with severe autism and Down's syndrome would be so clueless about psychology.
(2) I disagree. I think most gcc developers would fix this kind of bug quickly if it were pointed out. They'd also perhaps be open to a broader discussion about quality control.
It seems like you're saying that we should all accept (1) and (2) as interchangeable, and if someone has a problem with (1) he needs to just grow a thicker skin. I think that's unreasonable, and not a standard of discourse that many of us want to work with.
Until then, I don't see any other way to do right by my kids except to stay the path, keep wasting my time and basically forfeit my happiness.
Sorry things seem to hopeless. That was actually my point about looking into Christianity though. If you do, and if you decide it's likely-enough true that you're willing to become a Christian, you might find yourself happy regardless of what job you have.
I disagree with lots and lots of what you said, but rather than arguing I'd prefer to just offer some advice.
If CS / IT / software-development isn't working out the way you hoped, is it perhaps time to switch fields? There are so many livings most persons can make: law, medicine (especially nursing which doesn't require 12 years of preparation), business administration, sales, marketing, etc.
Or if you'd rather work with your hands, you can maybe do technical college at night to prepare for a trade (electrical, plumbing, HVAC, car repair, etc.) You'd probably take a big income hit at first, but it sounds like you're already not raking in the money you expected with your current work anyway.
Another possibility is to stay with computers, but start your own business doing repair, consulting, freelance software development, etc. That might ease some of your frustrations stemming from unappreciative bosses, coworkers, office politics, etc.
And there's kind of a meta-point I'd like to make. It's not a normal/. thing, but it's worth mentioning because I suspect it's true and relevant. You sound unhappy with life in general. It sounds like you're blaming your circumstances, but your complaints are so broad that I suspect you're more deeply unhappy than just with the issues you mentioned. I'm suspect that what the Christians say about Jesus is true. I recommend looking into that carefully. You may find that if your life has actual purpose, your concerns about IT work fade into the background.
The particular phrasing of the threats may be selective based on the gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. of the person being insulted.
But I think a more important issue is whether or not women are getting more vitriol than are men, regardless of the particular phrasing. For example, if 20% of women players get called cunts, and 20% of gay male players get called faggots, do those women have a point about being singled out? I'd argue no.
However, if 20% of female players get treated with scorn, and only 3% of male players do, then the female players have more of a fair point about being singled out.
Why does she get to stereotype men? Why do women get to put all their problems on men? When men do this, we're misogynistic. When women do this, well, men need to be more sensitive.
I think you have a point, but I also think you're confusing two issues.
She may or may not be making a valid generalization. I haven't read her article, so I can't say. But issue #1 is whether or not her complaint is worth considering.
Issue #2 is whether or not it's hypocritical for a women to paint men with a broad brush. But that issue can be treated entirely separately from issue #1.
From the small sample of these accounts I've read, I get the sense that the women in question have a limited perspective. My impression is that in many cases, they encounter career or workplace challenges, and falsely assume that only women have those challenges.
Balancing work and family responsibilities? Please, do you know how many days I've left work after sunset and nearly cried for not having that time with my little kids?
Getting criticized harshly? Shoot, I deal with that often. I just don't blog about it. What I do is go home, try to shake it off, and maybe talk to my wife about how it's bothering me. I don't cry about it, and maybe this is a guy thing, but I cry almost never. But that doesn't mean it doesn't bother me.
And then there are some complaints which seem more about personal choices than about unfairness. I don't come across many good, female software engineers. You know what else I rarely come across? Female aspiring software engineers who spend their nights hacking away at code to improve their skills.
Now I have no doubt that some challenges really are unique to being a female developer. Sexual harassment is probably the top one. But that issue kind of gets drowned out of the conversation given all of the kvetching that some women have regarding other issues that they wrongly assume are peculiar to them.
Slashdot Mirror
For personal projects, sure. When you're working on someone else's dime, that's their call.
I think it's a poor simile. Software developers for most projects are asked to make revisions at a pace far faster than those for airplanes. This leads to various shortcuts. If documentation and testing were really that important for software, then the pace of new development would go way down and/or the # of person-hours involved in each change would go way up.
Perhaps a better simile would be what happens with mission-critical software. I suspect (but don't know) that the documentation is a lot better.
Yes there is, other Barry, yes there is.
Those are preparing to be lawyers, not judges or prosecutors.
I thought that even civil and defense lawyers are considered officers of the court.
I also think that even they are given certain powers not available to regular citizens, such as issuing subpoenas. I thought that was one of the reasons for requiring even them to be of good character.
In never heard about this. Can you give a little more info?
Same thing for me. I'm naturally biased against paying exorbitant prices for papers that the publisher received for free. So for my PhD work I basically avoided using papers that were only available by paying ACM, IEEE, or Elsevier.
Fortunately, in the age of CiteSeer, Google Scholar, and authors who publish their own papers even if they've submitted them to journals, I was able to boycott those publishers and still get my PhD done. Also, having a good team of technical librarians goes a long way.
5-10 years ago though, I'm not sure I could have so easily avoided paying money to those publishers.
Yeah, same for me. The ACM journals IEEE Transactions were really useful reading while I was working on my Master's. By the time I got to my PhD work though, the combination of Google Scholar, CiteSeer, and papers being available over the internet (probably in contravention to author's agreements with the journals that published the paper) made ACM and IEEE irrelevant.
It seems to me that the only part of ACM's publication system that's still relevant is the selection and vetting of good papers for their journals. So maybe they should just continue that editorial process, and periodically publish those papers as PDF's on their website. Heck, I bet Google or Amazon or MIT would host that for free.
I think that would test whether or not ACM is focused more on advancing computing as a science vs. maintaining its own bureaucracy.
If we can't trust these applicants to take the test honestly, how can we trust them to act as officers of a court?
But you sir are on this site. What weight then shall we give your post?
I thought he was arguing against HB1 visas that import foreign workers instead of trying to hire more diverse American workers.
That's my best guess too. What if those workers are black? Or black and from impoverished countries? I'm curious if a liberal Democrat can bring himself to say "Americans first."
From a NYT article:
As I read it, America is about 63% non-Hispanic white. Which sounds pretty close to Google's proportion of white technical staff.
It sounds like Jackson really needs to have a discussion as to why black people are being so out-hired by Asians.
He seems convinced that the tech companies with the fewest black developers make the most amazing products.
It seems he's basically arguing that there's a correlation (and therefore maybe causality) between being diverse and not leading the market.
I'm confused... is Jackson arguing for more Americans, or more black people, or more black Americans, to get tech jobs?
After listening to Jackson over the years, it's now almost a reflex for me to argue against his statements. But I'm still sketchy on what they are in this case.
It's pretty clear at this point that the executive branch can get away with completely ignoring any law they want, without actual repercussion.
Congress fiddles while our separated-powers republic burns. I can't find words for how much I hate Congress and the President for this.
From the article:
Misra came up with a formula
So, now Jar Jar Binks does C.S.? Shit...
Let's look at two ways someone might respond to your viewpoint:
(1) How could a stupid cunt like you even bother posting such a moronic comment? Seriously, go die in a fire and I hope your kids get leukemia. Only someone with severe autism and Down's syndrome would be so clueless about psychology.
(2) I disagree. I think most gcc developers would fix this kind of bug quickly if it were pointed out. They'd also perhaps be open to a broader discussion about quality control.
It seems like you're saying that we should all accept (1) and (2) as interchangeable, and if someone has a problem with (1) he needs to just grow a thicker skin. I think that's unreasonable, and not a standard of discourse that many of us want to work with.
Sorry things seem to hopeless. That was actually my point about looking into Christianity though. If you do, and if you decide it's likely-enough true that you're willing to become a Christian, you might find yourself happy regardless of what job you have.
linux.softpedia.com
osnews.com
Linux Today
Linux Weekly News
I disagree with lots and lots of what you said, but rather than arguing I'd prefer to just offer some advice.
If CS / IT / software-development isn't working out the way you hoped, is it perhaps time to switch fields? There are so many livings most persons can make: law, medicine (especially nursing which doesn't require 12 years of preparation), business administration, sales, marketing, etc.
Or if you'd rather work with your hands, you can maybe do technical college at night to prepare for a trade (electrical, plumbing, HVAC, car repair, etc.) You'd probably take a big income hit at first, but it sounds like you're already not raking in the money you expected with your current work anyway.
Another possibility is to stay with computers, but start your own business doing repair, consulting, freelance software development, etc. That might ease some of your frustrations stemming from unappreciative bosses, coworkers, office politics, etc.
And there's kind of a meta-point I'd like to make. It's not a normal /. thing, but it's worth mentioning because I suspect it's true and relevant. You sound unhappy with life in general. It sounds like you're blaming your circumstances, but your complaints are so broad that I suspect you're more deeply unhappy than just with the issues you mentioned. I'm suspect that what the Christians say about Jesus is true. I recommend looking into that carefully. You may find that if your life has actual purpose, your concerns about IT work fade into the background.
Sure it would be. They'd just send their H1B guests from Africa to do the dangerous work.
Maybe many women players get treated nastily.
But how many boyfriends have had to tag along while their S.O.'s go shoe shopping?
There are many forms of violence.
The particular phrasing of the threats may be selective based on the gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. of the person being insulted.
But I think a more important issue is whether or not women are getting more vitriol than are men, regardless of the particular phrasing. For example, if 20% of women players get called cunts, and 20% of gay male players get called faggots, do those women have a point about being singled out? I'd argue no.
However, if 20% of female players get treated with scorn, and only 3% of male players do, then the female players have more of a fair point about being singled out.
Why does she get to stereotype men? Why do women get to put all their problems on men? When men do this, we're misogynistic. When women do this, well, men need to be more sensitive.
I think you have a point, but I also think you're confusing two issues.
She may or may not be making a valid generalization. I haven't read her article, so I can't say. But issue #1 is whether or not her complaint is worth considering.
Issue #2 is whether or not it's hypocritical for a women to paint men with a broad brush. But that issue can be treated entirely separately from issue #1.
You don't bother. You have no obligation to respond to her complaints if you don't feel like it.
From the small sample of these accounts I've read, I get the sense that the women in question have a limited perspective. My impression is that in many cases, they encounter career or workplace challenges, and falsely assume that only women have those challenges.
Balancing work and family responsibilities? Please, do you know how many days I've left work after sunset and nearly cried for not having that time with my little kids?
Getting criticized harshly? Shoot, I deal with that often. I just don't blog about it. What I do is go home, try to shake it off, and maybe talk to my wife about how it's bothering me. I don't cry about it, and maybe this is a guy thing, but I cry almost never. But that doesn't mean it doesn't bother me.
And then there are some complaints which seem more about personal choices than about unfairness. I don't come across many good, female software engineers. You know what else I rarely come across? Female aspiring software engineers who spend their nights hacking away at code to improve their skills.
Now I have no doubt that some challenges really are unique to being a female developer. Sexual harassment is probably the top one. But that issue kind of gets drowned out of the conversation given all of the kvetching that some women have regarding other issues that they wrongly assume are peculiar to them.