They work for those who control the votes. As long as the majority of the population votes for the person who spends the most on TV adverts, and there are no limits on the amounts and kinds of advertising that they can do (e.g. political exemptions from do-not-call lists, from truth in advertising laws) , they will work for the people who are most able to give them the money that they need to finance this advertising.
I'm not quite sure how one could make it even more obvious without punching the user in the face.
How about by not conflating data, formulae, and layout in the UI? This is an error made by all VisiCalc clones, but not by Improv clones. If you use something like Improv, FlexiSheet or Quantrix then this kind of error is almost impossible to make. If you use something like VisiCalc, 1-2-3, Excel or OpenOffice.org Calc, it is trivial.
If management is so brilliant it can identify dead wood when it is forced to, why couldn't it identify dead wood before hiring them or remove them before intense negative financial pressure requires them to do so?
Often, there are internal pressures not to do so because middle management has a poor incentive structure. When the company is doing okay, if you have a couple of non-productive people in your team then you still get the prestige for having n people reporting to you. If you could fire them with no loss in productivity, then you'd have n-2 people reporting to you, which effectively means that you become more junior. As there is no loss of productivity, you couldn't justify two new hires and so your team's budget would also shrink and, as a more junior manager, their promotion prospects would dwindle.
On the other hand, when the company starts to do badly, middle managers who can shrink their budgets without shrinking their output (by as much) are seen as an asset. They are the ones who are most likely to be promoted, often as a result of consolidating teams by firing the middle managers who aren't able to shrink their budgets.
A number of companies have tried to avoid this, but unfortunately it's often very difficult to encourage managers to reduce their costs without also giving them an incentive to do things like underfund R&D, which will give a quick and obvious cost reduction and typically a not provide a reduction in output for the short term, leaving their replacement to sort out the mess that they've made.
Netflix probably wants DRM too, FWIW. Remember their model is based upon people getting unlimited access to their library but paying by the month. If it were easy for their customers to simply download and save all the movies they're interested in over the space of a month, and then unsubscribe for a few months until the next time they see movies they're interested in, then the entire model would break down - less revenues received, and more money spent on bandwidth per month.
The problem with that argument is that it's bullshit. If you look at the most popular lists on services like Netflix, they're full of new releases. I don't subscribe to a rental service just because they have a big catalogue, I subscribe to them because they have a big and growing catalogue. At any given time, my DVD rental list has a number of unreleased things, which are added to the main list as they are released. If I had infinite local storage and bandwidth, I could download everything that they had that I might want to watch today, and their service next month would still be valuable to me next month. On the other hand, the fact that I can't download 20 hours of their content today and watch it on a transatlantic flight or a long train journey means that it is less valuable than a DRM-free service would be.
Yes, that's what I said. You can write using a subset of OpenCL, in a particular style, and have fast code on AMD GPUs. You can write using a subset of OpenCL, in a particular style, and have fast code on nVidia GPUs. You can write using a subset of OpenCL, in a particular style, and have fast code on ARM GPUs. You can write using a subset of OpenCL, in a particular style, and have fast code on Intel GPUs. You can write using a subset of OpenCL, in a particular style, and have fast code on CPUs. These subsets and styles are somewhat overlapping, but taking code written to run fast on nVidia GPUs and compiling to to run fast on AMD or Intel GPUs is very hard.
No, the credit doesn't expire, but some of the bundles do. You can usually either use your credit to buy minutes / messages as you use them, or buy in bulk for a lower price but only valid for a certain amount of time. The only network in the UK I've ever seen do it differently was Orange, which from about 1998-2000 made minutes of talk time and SMS cost less if you had topped up with a £50 card than if you'd topped up with smaller ones.
This is how you do decent shilling. Everything he said is true, his problem was his omission. The MS stack does provide a reasonable MVC programming model for web applications. So do a number of other competing frameworks, many of which are more scalable, free (to deploy and to get the dev tools), cross-platform (do you really want to be forced to run Windows on your server? Even if you like the platform, you'll pay more if you want to deploy it in something like EC2 because of the HVM overhead), and which have been around longer.
OpenCL is a fairly typical industry standard. All of the major industry players wanted to ensure that it could be compiled to their GPUs, so it ended up with an abstract model that doesn't really match any GPU and a load of features that exist because one GPU has a very fast path for executing them, but none of the others do. Come to an LLVM Dev Meeting some time and you'll hear about a hundred compiler developers complaining about it. When you have some MIMD, some SIMD, and some SIMT architectures all trying to run the same code, all implementing a different set of ALU ops, writing code with vaguely predictable performance is really hard, and trying to run code written with one target in mind on a different one with reasonable performance is very hard.
Smalltalk-80 (or even Smalltalk-76) is more akin to what they seem to be describing than most lisp implementations. In Smalltalk-80, you can inspect every object in the system, visually, including the objects that comprise the inspector for whatever you're looking at, and you can modify any value on the stack, at any depth, unwind it and so on.
The problem with SpamAssassin (at least, as I've seen it deployed), is that it only determines if something is spam after the MTA has sent an acknowledgement that it has been received. At this point, you have to deliver it to the user's spam folder, because if you don't then neither the sender nor the receiver knows if a non-spam mail is accidentally dropped because of a false-positive. The nice thing about DNSBLs is that you can reject the mail early, so the sender gets a reject message. They can then try to contact you by some other means (or try to work out why they have been blacklisted). This is one of the things SPF is meant to address. If you get a mail that has a valid SPF entry for the domain then it is a notice saying 'if you accept this but bounce it back later, then either it's spam or the bounce notification will get to the correct party'.
The electricity grid has a number of things avoid the situation that you are describing. Perhaps the most common is the pumped-storage hydroelectric dam, which uses excess electricity to power motors that pump electricity from a lower lake to a higher one and turbines that are powered by the water flowing in the other direction. A lot of power stations also have large flywheels that can store minutes worth of their total output, in case of sudden drops. These all damp the fluctuations in supply and demand and allow the production to very closely follow demand. Supply absolutely does not run at peak expected demand, except for some power stations that run at a fixed capacity to provide base load.
You seem to be trying to disagree by interpreting 'wind power' in a different way to everyone else. The people who are not you in this thread interpret the phrase as meaning 'electricity that is generated from wind using current wind turbines'. You are using it to mean 'the energy present in the wind, independent of whether it is even feasible to extract it'. The problem with your definition is twofold: First, it is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand (i.e. the fungible nature of electricity and the fact that it is easy to increase the supply from sources such as coal plants but that wind power supply does not scale with demand but with the weather up to a maximum that is limited by the number and types of turbines). Second, it gives completely meaningless and irrelevant numbers.
Among other things, its analysis found that those applicants who have bothered to install new web browsers on their computers (such as Mozilla's Firefox or Google's Chrome)
You can't judge that, all you can judge is which browser people are using. I'm using Safari on Mac, but I have Chrome (and the Dart version) FireFox, and Opera installed. None of them integrate properly with the system toolchain, none has the nice command-number shortcuts for the bookmarks bar, and all have other UI quirks that annoy me (although Safari's integration of the address and search bars is really pissing me off, as it keeps autocompleting search terms to random URLs).
And some of them charge an insane percentage. One of my friends recently discovered that the recruiter he was going through added a 100% markup to his hourly rate. He's now waiting for the non-compete part of the contract to expire before going to work for the company full time. He'll get a hefty pay rise and they'll pay a lot less for him, and both will be very happy...
An H1B can't be paid less than the prevailing wage for a position of the same type. The problem is that 'the same type' is difficult to define. You can take the prevailing wage for inexperienced PHP developers and then say that this is the prevailing wage for programmers and so you can pay embedded C developers that much.
Good. Then you are willing to exchange one/. post for one gram of gold? Fantastic! I have thousands of them.
No, and one Bitcoin also can't be exchanged for one unit of computational work. That work was done in the creation of it.
Yet again, this demonstrates an ignorance of how monetary standards work
Yes, that's what everyone has been telling you.
You can't just declare them and expect them to work. You have to back them up. In the case of Bitcoin, it is firmly backed up by the way Bitcoin was designed to work. That can't be changed.
BitCoin is not backed by anything. That is the point. There is no organisation or mechanism that guarantees that if you have one BitCoin you can exchange it for something else.
No one is arguing that. For example, a currency backed by gold is valuable because someone has a pile of gold and the currency is just a load of tokens keeping track of how much gold they owe you. The argument against BitCoin is that it is not backed by anything, not even the somewhat nebulous (but, usually reliable) promise that a government will accept it in taxes. The wild fluctuations in the value of BitCoins indicate that most of the traders are speculators and there is no organisation that says 'I guarantee to exchange the BitCoins for something else of (perceived) worth', such as gold, silver, or nullification of debts.
I have just defined the value of Slashdot posts to be one gram of gold. That is now their intrinsic value. Oh, wait, no it isn't. simply asserting the value of something doesn't make it have that value, and neither does repeating that you have defined its value to be that. If I burn a piece of paper, the intrinsic value of the ash and smoke is not equal to the piece of paper - it can not be used in the same way, and it can not be freely converted back into the piece of paper. If I could take a Bitcoin and turn it into a unit of computational effort, then that would be its intrinsic value. If a Bitcoin were a promise to do some computational work the the future, then that would mean it is backed by computational work. Neither of these holds.
Argument that "paying taxes" gives currencies value is bullshit. It only shows that governments are ubiquitous, and nothing about currencies.
The value of a currency is that you can find someone who will exchange it for something that has value to you. The fact that everyone in the USA (and, in theory, every US company) must pay taxes in US dollars means that there is a large body of people who produce goods and services and want US dollars.
What gives a currency value is people accepting it, being government or not.
What gives a currency value is the belief that people will accept it in the future. This means that I can accept it in payment for my goods or services now and know that I will be able to use it to buy the goods or services that I want in the future. Governments accepting it for taxes that are due at the end of a year mean that there is a very high probability that it will hold most (95%+) of its value for the rest of the current tax year and so it works as a medium of exchange.
In 2002, I was on the admin team for my university computer society. We had four new workstations with GeForce 2 MX400 GPUs (I think). We ran the blob drivers, which were mostly okay, except that they caused kernel panics about once a day. If we used the vesa driver, there were no kernel panics, but we didn't get 3D acceleration. At home, I had a Radeon R200, which I used with the open source drivers on FreeBSD and it worked fine, with uptime only ending because I rebooted into a different OS.
You put a version of your resume for Slashdot online as a Word document? First complaint: know your audience. Some recruiters will require Word documents (usually the shady ones, who want to edit it before passing it on), but if you're putting it here then use PDF. That also means that the formatting won't be screwed up when the person opening it has a different version of Word, different printer drivers, or different fonts installed. Oh, and using Word also means that when I open it with my locale set to English, I get red underlines for some US spellings - probably fine if you're applying to a US company, but just another thing that can prejudice a reviewer against you, and that's before I even start reading it.
The page limit thing is definitely a US thing. In the UK it's normally 3 pages, but with the important caveat that a lot of the time people will only read the first page. I'd recommend extending it, but do make sure that the most important stuff is on the first page.
Now let's start at the top:
Seeking Software Engineering position utilizing my computer programming and design skills
How about a full sentence? Seeking a software engineering position. Oh, and why do you capitalise Software Engineering? You don't capitalise Computer Programming. I'll cut you some slack here, because this sentence should be tailored to each application, so I'll assume it's a placeholder.
Now, on to General Skills. You're a Pro Gamer. So what? The competition part should go in the Accomplishments section, the fact you're a Pro Gamer means nothing unless you can say that it gives you some skills that might be transferable. Did you have to work as a team in this competition? The Learning part is self-assessed and therefore meaningless. How many languages have you picked up this way and written anything non-trivial in? With no evidence, this is just 'I think I'm great' and that's a waste of a line.
Computer Skills. The only one that you give any quantitative information about is C++, but 10,000 hours? Over what period of time? What is the context? Who were you working for then? Don't put these in isolation, put them in context. An HR drone will not bother to try to compare the 10,000 hours you quote to the 3 (or whatever) years the job requires, they'll just bin it. Someone more careful will look at the post and say
Next, Experience. URL shortener links? I'm going to assume that they're malicious and not click on them. People will either read CVs on screen (and so can click on proper links) or on paper (and so won't bother typing in any URLs). On the first pass, you get 1-3 minutes to impress someone. Links don't do that. Let's look at each part:
You worked on two games for a startup as 'main programmer' (what does this mean? Team leader? Or just most self-important person?). Lots of unsupported adjectives. What does 'Published on Shockwave' mean? The game was? You did? Why do I care, as a potential employer? I don't care how many levels the dungeon crawler has, I care what skills you had to use there. 'Unique puzzle game. It takes a moment to learn, but it is fun, and has strategies' is pretty appalling English ('and has strategies?'), is self-assessed, and is irrelevant. A (properly cited) quote from a review might be relevant if you are applying for a job as a game designer, but then only if it's relevant to your contribution.
Independent work shouldn't be a heading. If you were self-employed then, say that. If you started a company, say that. If you were consulting, say that. Again, I don't care what kind of game you wrote. I care what skills you developed, what your original contributions to the project were, and so on.
Geek Squad? Why were you working there in the middle of a career as a programmer and at the same time that you were independent? Your software wasn't selling? It was a requirement of your probation? You needed to make a bona fide effort to get a job to
Slashdot Mirror
They work for those who control the votes. As long as the majority of the population votes for the person who spends the most on TV adverts, and there are no limits on the amounts and kinds of advertising that they can do (e.g. political exemptions from do-not-call lists, from truth in advertising laws) , they will work for the people who are most able to give them the money that they need to finance this advertising.
I'm not quite sure how one could make it even more obvious without punching the user in the face.
How about by not conflating data, formulae, and layout in the UI? This is an error made by all VisiCalc clones, but not by Improv clones. If you use something like Improv, FlexiSheet or Quantrix then this kind of error is almost impossible to make. If you use something like VisiCalc, 1-2-3, Excel or OpenOffice.org Calc, it is trivial.
If management is so brilliant it can identify dead wood when it is forced to, why couldn't it identify dead wood before hiring them or remove them before intense negative financial pressure requires them to do so?
Often, there are internal pressures not to do so because middle management has a poor incentive structure. When the company is doing okay, if you have a couple of non-productive people in your team then you still get the prestige for having n people reporting to you. If you could fire them with no loss in productivity, then you'd have n-2 people reporting to you, which effectively means that you become more junior. As there is no loss of productivity, you couldn't justify two new hires and so your team's budget would also shrink and, as a more junior manager, their promotion prospects would dwindle.
On the other hand, when the company starts to do badly, middle managers who can shrink their budgets without shrinking their output (by as much) are seen as an asset. They are the ones who are most likely to be promoted, often as a result of consolidating teams by firing the middle managers who aren't able to shrink their budgets.
A number of companies have tried to avoid this, but unfortunately it's often very difficult to encourage managers to reduce their costs without also giving them an incentive to do things like underfund R&D, which will give a quick and obvious cost reduction and typically a not provide a reduction in output for the short term, leaving their replacement to sort out the mess that they've made.
You can, however, make it enough of a pain in the ass that most people won't bother.
The problem is, it only takes one person to bother and release a nice GUI application that you point at the URL and then everyone can do it.
Netflix probably wants DRM too, FWIW. Remember their model is based upon people getting unlimited access to their library but paying by the month. If it were easy for their customers to simply download and save all the movies they're interested in over the space of a month, and then unsubscribe for a few months until the next time they see movies they're interested in, then the entire model would break down - less revenues received, and more money spent on bandwidth per month.
The problem with that argument is that it's bullshit. If you look at the most popular lists on services like Netflix, they're full of new releases. I don't subscribe to a rental service just because they have a big catalogue, I subscribe to them because they have a big and growing catalogue. At any given time, my DVD rental list has a number of unreleased things, which are added to the main list as they are released. If I had infinite local storage and bandwidth, I could download everything that they had that I might want to watch today, and their service next month would still be valuable to me next month. On the other hand, the fact that I can't download 20 hours of their content today and watch it on a transatlantic flight or a long train journey means that it is less valuable than a DRM-free service would be.
Yes, that's what I said. You can write using a subset of OpenCL, in a particular style, and have fast code on AMD GPUs. You can write using a subset of OpenCL, in a particular style, and have fast code on nVidia GPUs. You can write using a subset of OpenCL, in a particular style, and have fast code on ARM GPUs. You can write using a subset of OpenCL, in a particular style, and have fast code on Intel GPUs. You can write using a subset of OpenCL, in a particular style, and have fast code on CPUs. These subsets and styles are somewhat overlapping, but taking code written to run fast on nVidia GPUs and compiling to to run fast on AMD or Intel GPUs is very hard.
No, the credit doesn't expire, but some of the bundles do. You can usually either use your credit to buy minutes / messages as you use them, or buy in bulk for a lower price but only valid for a certain amount of time. The only network in the UK I've ever seen do it differently was Orange, which from about 1998-2000 made minutes of talk time and SMS cost less if you had topped up with a £50 card than if you'd topped up with smaller ones.
This is how you do decent shilling. Everything he said is true, his problem was his omission. The MS stack does provide a reasonable MVC programming model for web applications. So do a number of other competing frameworks, many of which are more scalable, free (to deploy and to get the dev tools), cross-platform (do you really want to be forced to run Windows on your server? Even if you like the platform, you'll pay more if you want to deploy it in something like EC2 because of the HVM overhead), and which have been around longer.
OpenCL is a fairly typical industry standard. All of the major industry players wanted to ensure that it could be compiled to their GPUs, so it ended up with an abstract model that doesn't really match any GPU and a load of features that exist because one GPU has a very fast path for executing them, but none of the others do. Come to an LLVM Dev Meeting some time and you'll hear about a hundred compiler developers complaining about it. When you have some MIMD, some SIMD, and some SIMT architectures all trying to run the same code, all implementing a different set of ALU ops, writing code with vaguely predictable performance is really hard, and trying to run code written with one target in mind on a different one with reasonable performance is very hard.
Smalltalk-80 (or even Smalltalk-76) is more akin to what they seem to be describing than most lisp implementations. In Smalltalk-80, you can inspect every object in the system, visually, including the objects that comprise the inspector for whatever you're looking at, and you can modify any value on the stack, at any depth, unwind it and so on.
The problem with SpamAssassin (at least, as I've seen it deployed), is that it only determines if something is spam after the MTA has sent an acknowledgement that it has been received. At this point, you have to deliver it to the user's spam folder, because if you don't then neither the sender nor the receiver knows if a non-spam mail is accidentally dropped because of a false-positive. The nice thing about DNSBLs is that you can reject the mail early, so the sender gets a reject message. They can then try to contact you by some other means (or try to work out why they have been blacklisted). This is one of the things SPF is meant to address. If you get a mail that has a valid SPF entry for the domain then it is a notice saying 'if you accept this but bounce it back later, then either it's spam or the bounce notification will get to the correct party'.
The electricity grid has a number of things avoid the situation that you are describing. Perhaps the most common is the pumped-storage hydroelectric dam, which uses excess electricity to power motors that pump electricity from a lower lake to a higher one and turbines that are powered by the water flowing in the other direction. A lot of power stations also have large flywheels that can store minutes worth of their total output, in case of sudden drops. These all damp the fluctuations in supply and demand and allow the production to very closely follow demand. Supply absolutely does not run at peak expected demand, except for some power stations that run at a fixed capacity to provide base load.
You seem to be trying to disagree by interpreting 'wind power' in a different way to everyone else. The people who are not you in this thread interpret the phrase as meaning 'electricity that is generated from wind using current wind turbines'. You are using it to mean 'the energy present in the wind, independent of whether it is even feasible to extract it'. The problem with your definition is twofold: First, it is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand (i.e. the fungible nature of electricity and the fact that it is easy to increase the supply from sources such as coal plants but that wind power supply does not scale with demand but with the weather up to a maximum that is limited by the number and types of turbines). Second, it gives completely meaningless and irrelevant numbers.
Among other things, its analysis found that those applicants who have bothered to install new web browsers on their computers (such as Mozilla's Firefox or Google's Chrome)
You can't judge that, all you can judge is which browser people are using. I'm using Safari on Mac, but I have Chrome (and the Dart version) FireFox, and Opera installed. None of them integrate properly with the system toolchain, none has the nice command-number shortcuts for the bookmarks bar, and all have other UI quirks that annoy me (although Safari's integration of the address and search bars is really pissing me off, as it keeps autocompleting search terms to random URLs).
And some of them charge an insane percentage. One of my friends recently discovered that the recruiter he was going through added a 100% markup to his hourly rate. He's now waiting for the non-compete part of the contract to expire before going to work for the company full time. He'll get a hefty pay rise and they'll pay a lot less for him, and both will be very happy...
An H1B can't be paid less than the prevailing wage for a position of the same type. The problem is that 'the same type' is difficult to define. You can take the prevailing wage for inexperienced PHP developers and then say that this is the prevailing wage for programmers and so you can pay embedded C developers that much.
Good. Then you are willing to exchange one /. post for one gram of gold? Fantastic! I have thousands of them.
No, and one Bitcoin also can't be exchanged for one unit of computational work. That work was done in the creation of it.
Yet again, this demonstrates an ignorance of how monetary standards work
Yes, that's what everyone has been telling you.
You can't just declare them and expect them to work. You have to back them up. In the case of Bitcoin, it is firmly backed up by the way Bitcoin was designed to work. That can't be changed.
BitCoin is not backed by anything. That is the point. There is no organisation or mechanism that guarantees that if you have one BitCoin you can exchange it for something else.
Perhaps he means that multiple sclerosis is the best degenerative disease?
traditional hard drives, which rarely fail so badly and suddenly that there isn't at least a chance to move data off
From your UID, you've been using computers for at least 10 years, in which case all I can say is that you've been very fortunate so far...
No one is arguing that. For example, a currency backed by gold is valuable because someone has a pile of gold and the currency is just a load of tokens keeping track of how much gold they owe you. The argument against BitCoin is that it is not backed by anything, not even the somewhat nebulous (but, usually reliable) promise that a government will accept it in taxes. The wild fluctuations in the value of BitCoins indicate that most of the traders are speculators and there is no organisation that says 'I guarantee to exchange the BitCoins for something else of (perceived) worth', such as gold, silver, or nullification of debts.
I have just defined the value of Slashdot posts to be one gram of gold. That is now their intrinsic value. Oh, wait, no it isn't. simply asserting the value of something doesn't make it have that value, and neither does repeating that you have defined its value to be that. If I burn a piece of paper, the intrinsic value of the ash and smoke is not equal to the piece of paper - it can not be used in the same way, and it can not be freely converted back into the piece of paper. If I could take a Bitcoin and turn it into a unit of computational effort, then that would be its intrinsic value. If a Bitcoin were a promise to do some computational work the the future, then that would mean it is backed by computational work. Neither of these holds.
Argument that "paying taxes" gives currencies value is bullshit. It only shows that governments are ubiquitous, and nothing about currencies.
The value of a currency is that you can find someone who will exchange it for something that has value to you. The fact that everyone in the USA (and, in theory, every US company) must pay taxes in US dollars means that there is a large body of people who produce goods and services and want US dollars.
What gives a currency value is people accepting it, being government or not.
What gives a currency value is the belief that people will accept it in the future. This means that I can accept it in payment for my goods or services now and know that I will be able to use it to buy the goods or services that I want in the future. Governments accepting it for taxes that are due at the end of a year mean that there is a very high probability that it will hold most (95%+) of its value for the rest of the current tax year and so it works as a medium of exchange.
In 2002, I was on the admin team for my university computer society. We had four new workstations with GeForce 2 MX400 GPUs (I think). We ran the blob drivers, which were mostly okay, except that they caused kernel panics about once a day. If we used the vesa driver, there were no kernel panics, but we didn't get 3D acceleration. At home, I had a Radeon R200, which I used with the open source drivers on FreeBSD and it worked fine, with uptime only ending because I rebooted into a different OS.
But the other team has a different colour banner, so they must be worse!
You put a version of your resume for Slashdot online as a Word document? First complaint: know your audience. Some recruiters will require Word documents (usually the shady ones, who want to edit it before passing it on), but if you're putting it here then use PDF. That also means that the formatting won't be screwed up when the person opening it has a different version of Word, different printer drivers, or different fonts installed. Oh, and using Word also means that when I open it with my locale set to English, I get red underlines for some US spellings - probably fine if you're applying to a US company, but just another thing that can prejudice a reviewer against you, and that's before I even start reading it.
The page limit thing is definitely a US thing. In the UK it's normally 3 pages, but with the important caveat that a lot of the time people will only read the first page. I'd recommend extending it, but do make sure that the most important stuff is on the first page.
Now let's start at the top:
Seeking Software Engineering position utilizing my computer programming and design skills
How about a full sentence? Seeking a software engineering position. Oh, and why do you capitalise Software Engineering? You don't capitalise Computer Programming. I'll cut you some slack here, because this sentence should be tailored to each application, so I'll assume it's a placeholder.
Now, on to General Skills. You're a Pro Gamer. So what? The competition part should go in the Accomplishments section, the fact you're a Pro Gamer means nothing unless you can say that it gives you some skills that might be transferable. Did you have to work as a team in this competition? The Learning part is self-assessed and therefore meaningless. How many languages have you picked up this way and written anything non-trivial in? With no evidence, this is just 'I think I'm great' and that's a waste of a line.
Computer Skills. The only one that you give any quantitative information about is C++, but 10,000 hours? Over what period of time? What is the context? Who were you working for then? Don't put these in isolation, put them in context. An HR drone will not bother to try to compare the 10,000 hours you quote to the 3 (or whatever) years the job requires, they'll just bin it. Someone more careful will look at the post and say
Next, Experience. URL shortener links? I'm going to assume that they're malicious and not click on them. People will either read CVs on screen (and so can click on proper links) or on paper (and so won't bother typing in any URLs). On the first pass, you get 1-3 minutes to impress someone. Links don't do that. Let's look at each part:
You worked on two games for a startup as 'main programmer' (what does this mean? Team leader? Or just most self-important person?). Lots of unsupported adjectives. What does 'Published on Shockwave' mean? The game was? You did? Why do I care, as a potential employer? I don't care how many levels the dungeon crawler has, I care what skills you had to use there. 'Unique puzzle game. It takes a moment to learn, but it is fun, and has strategies' is pretty appalling English ('and has strategies?'), is self-assessed, and is irrelevant. A (properly cited) quote from a review might be relevant if you are applying for a job as a game designer, but then only if it's relevant to your contribution.
Independent work shouldn't be a heading. If you were self-employed then, say that. If you started a company, say that. If you were consulting, say that. Again, I don't care what kind of game you wrote. I care what skills you developed, what your original contributions to the project were, and so on.
Geek Squad? Why were you working there in the middle of a career as a programmer and at the same time that you were independent? Your software wasn't selling? It was a requirement of your probation? You needed to make a bona fide effort to get a job to