That sucks. Well, it's great that you do have good health insurance now, of course. I'm fortunate enough to live in a country with standardized health insurance. Some companies do have collective health insurance that's slightly cheaper than regular health insurance, but regular is still quite affordable, and I don't think insurers can refuse you. (Although I've heard of someone with HIV who's afraid he can't get a good insurance if he leaves his government job, so maybe the situation is less ideal than it should be. His situation sounds like something that shouldn't be an issue in our system.)
He was talking explicitly about storing javascript objects, not a mapping to simple fields. And javascript objects can contain code. I admit I don't know much about MongoDB and node.js, but it seems to me that if client and server share database objects, there's a risk that client-side objects can be used to get code executed on the server side.
Maybe MongoDB or node.js come with special security measures to prevent that, but you do need that extra security. Java style security is not enough.
I guess TFA is about node.js? We've known for ages that Javascript was a terrible language, and that hasn't stopped it from becoming huge, and being supported by every browser. Javascript on the browser isn't going away. The big question is whether we should really want it on the server too.
I recently was at a talk by someone who used javascript and AJAX on the client, node.js at the server, and MongoDB to store javascript objects, either from client or server. I'm sure you can imagine the possible security issues for a setup like that.
Netherland has both a tax on fuel, and a periodical tax on vehicles. The heavier the vehicle, the more tax, but diesel and LPG cars pay extra (which is offset by cheaper fuel).
But what amazes me most about this discussion is that everybody is discussing how it's going to be enforced, rather than how it's the most terribly contra-productive idea of the year. Somehow it doesn't sound like Oregon to encourage people to drive dirty fuel guzzlers. Texas, sure, but I thought Oregon was a bit more progressive than that.
I disagree. You do this through code review by linking to your team/company coding standards (you do have those, right?).
I think this is the best answer. If your company has no coding standards and no code review, there's not really any good way of addressing bad code from a senior co-worker. So insist on coding standards and code review. Make sure the senior co-worker is involved, but don't let him do it alone. And then you have a platform to discuss this professionally.
Not as brutal can be a huge difference. Scientology tends to be extremely brutal. They go out of their way to bankrupt and discredit you no matter where you live. Though I admit Mormon areas don't sound like very attractive places to live.
Interpreting that first bug as a compiler problem is incomprehensible to me. Even if you don't see right away what a bunch of `if-then return` statements do, surely you notice how it works the first time you walk through it?
The first time I read it, I assumed that the bug was the exact opposite: that it did reach the line of code it wasn't supposed to reach, which can only happen if the value of `UnitIsHarvester(unit)` changes during the execution of that code. That would have been an interesting bug. As it is, it smells of incompetence and bad practice. (But then, 12 hours days are bad practice. Horrid code is probably to be expected.)
Fairness is a rare thing. I had a problem recently with a company that didn't want to pay me. Well, they did, just not as much as they technically owed me. Fortunately I have a legal insurance that gives me (among other things) free legal advice from a legal expert. Best decision I ever made (well, apart from marrying my wife). He told me that when they contest the invoice, a debt collector agency won't work for me. I need to either get a settlement with them, or sue them, and then the judge will still expect us to settle. You can threaten with legal proceedings, but in the end, you're going to have to settle anyway. A lawsuit will merely drive up the cost for both parties.
I was really itching to sue them or send a debt collector after them, but in the end I just settled for about $1000 less than what they should have paid me. The time and money that a lawsuit would cost me just wasn't worth it, and there's no guarantee the debt collector would have gotten much more out of them. Sometimes you need to cut your losses. Fairness may just be too expensive. It was a valuable lesson.
Of course this was a Dutch situation. In other countries and across borders, it's bound to work completely differently.
No, stay professional. If they're not actively contesting the invoices, just neglecting to pay them, get a debt collection agency (no-cure no-ay if necessary) and send them after them. They may get your money for you, and if not, they may sue them for you.
In any case, don't get advice from random people online, get advice from lawyers and debt collectors who know about this sort of thing. Who know the relevant laws in your and their country, who know relevant treaties, etc.
But surely if you're a dev shop that has existed for more than a year, you already knew this.
Why is this Insightful? It's completely irrelevant! Not every call is automatically an international call, you know. Or is it currently impossible to call India from the US?
Too bad they're in the process of completely fucking up the ticket system. I used to be a fan of public transportation, but they're making it impossible for me now.
I like her about a million times better as Eurocommissioner than as a minister. She's seriously doing some really good stuff now, and is the only Eurocommissioner that I regularly hear something positive from.
Step 3 is "Get as much money out of the company as you can, and saddle it with debt". That's how Romney did it, and it looks like these people did pretty much the same thing. Bonus points for making the company loan the money with which you buy it.
Do you know why the money was gone? The executives took it. They got an 80% pay raise despite the looming bankruptcy. They were asking the workers to sacrifice in order to keep their golden goose alive, but didn't want to share any of the eggs.
In cases like this, ownership of the company should pass to the workers. They're the victims of the executives' greed.
So it's okay for a single person pillaging a company to death just because his salary is a drop in the bucket compared to everything else? He's still enriching himself to a ridiculous degree at the cost to everybody else. Had he taken a pay cut like everybody else, he could have expected a lot more sympathy from his workers. If he keeps enriching himself while steering the company down the drain, he should expect his golden goose to die.
Yeah, blame it on the union, when in reality it was the executives who looted the company to death and asked the workers to foot the bill. It was intentional mismanagement, and the executives belong in prison.
The workers shut them down exactly because they had really terrible management. They don't kill their own job over nothing. They'd been betrayed, and the company had been looted by hedge funds and executives, who now had the temerity to ask the workers to pay for the executives' greed.
From what I understand, the company has been in trouble for 10 years. The workers already took a hefty pay cut. That money wasn't used to fix the company, but to give executives big raises (like 70-80%). And now they're asking the workers to take another pay cut so they can loot the company even more? Fuck them.
What we need is a law that in the case of intentional destructive mismanagement, workers who received a pay cut in the past get first claim to the company's assets. As it is, they get last claim (after banks and shareholders). Give them first claim, and the workers would be able to restart the company without the meddling of hedge funds and executives, and banks would demand that companies are run in a healthy manner, instead of looted like this.
If you think this is a way forward, you should think again. Open a couple of history books, look for countries that tried it and look how and why it failed.
Do you actually think before giving these advices?
I'd love to see an explanation of what you were thinking when you wrote this, because it doesn't seem to be making any sense.
Countries with proportional representation tend to be more democratic and have more dynamic democracies than countries with two-party systems. Two-party systems tend to polarize, and polarization tends to paralyze the politics of a country. Minority opinions don't get represented, and elections tend to degenerate to the choice for the lesser evil. Really, proportional representation is the way out.
The main way in which it's going to distinguish itself from other space sims is the usual: scale. It's going to have much more explorable stuff than any other game.
My biggest hope is that it's going to have procedurally generated unique, interesting alien civilizations filling the entire Milky Way.
Slashdot Mirror
A vulnerability in a blog is not quite the same thing as a vulnerability in a system used to submit tax returns.
That sucks. Well, it's great that you do have good health insurance now, of course. I'm fortunate enough to live in a country with standardized health insurance. Some companies do have collective health insurance that's slightly cheaper than regular health insurance, but regular is still quite affordable, and I don't think insurers can refuse you. (Although I've heard of someone with HIV who's afraid he can't get a good insurance if he leaves his government job, so maybe the situation is less ideal than it should be. His situation sounds like something that shouldn't be an issue in our system.)
I love my freelance life. It allows me to make a lot more plans, and actually accomplish them, than my salaried life used to allow. I like my freedom.
He was talking explicitly about storing javascript objects, not a mapping to simple fields. And javascript objects can contain code. I admit I don't know much about MongoDB and node.js, but it seems to me that if client and server share database objects, there's a risk that client-side objects can be used to get code executed on the server side.
Maybe MongoDB or node.js come with special security measures to prevent that, but you do need that extra security. Java style security is not enough.
I haven't read TFA, but I suspect they're talking about node.js. It makes sense if that's what they're talking about.
I guess TFA is about node.js? We've known for ages that Javascript was a terrible language, and that hasn't stopped it from becoming huge, and being supported by every browser. Javascript on the browser isn't going away. The big question is whether we should really want it on the server too.
I recently was at a talk by someone who used javascript and AJAX on the client, node.js at the server, and MongoDB to store javascript objects, either from client or server. I'm sure you can imagine the possible security issues for a setup like that.
Netherland has both a tax on fuel, and a periodical tax on vehicles. The heavier the vehicle, the more tax, but diesel and LPG cars pay extra (which is offset by cheaper fuel).
But what amazes me most about this discussion is that everybody is discussing how it's going to be enforced, rather than how it's the most terribly contra-productive idea of the year. Somehow it doesn't sound like Oregon to encourage people to drive dirty fuel guzzlers. Texas, sure, but I thought Oregon was a bit more progressive than that.
(eg. he grew up under communism but voted straight Democrat... WHAT?!)
I'm not entirely sure what you think the relevance of this is, but including such non-sequiturs does undermine your own judgement of his character.
I disagree. You do this through code review by linking to your team/company coding standards (you do have those, right?).
I think this is the best answer. If your company has no coding standards and no code review, there's not really any good way of addressing bad code from a senior co-worker. So insist on coding standards and code review. Make sure the senior co-worker is involved, but don't let him do it alone. And then you have a platform to discuss this professionally.
Not as brutal can be a huge difference. Scientology tends to be extremely brutal. They go out of their way to bankrupt and discredit you no matter where you live. Though I admit Mormon areas don't sound like very attractive places to live.
Interpreting that first bug as a compiler problem is incomprehensible to me. Even if you don't see right away what a bunch of `if-then return` statements do, surely you notice how it works the first time you walk through it?
The first time I read it, I assumed that the bug was the exact opposite: that it did reach the line of code it wasn't supposed to reach, which can only happen if the value of `UnitIsHarvester(unit)` changes during the execution of that code. That would have been an interesting bug. As it is, it smells of incompetence and bad practice. (But then, 12 hours days are bad practice. Horrid code is probably to be expected.)
Fairness is a rare thing. I had a problem recently with a company that didn't want to pay me. Well, they did, just not as much as they technically owed me. Fortunately I have a legal insurance that gives me (among other things) free legal advice from a legal expert. Best decision I ever made (well, apart from marrying my wife). He told me that when they contest the invoice, a debt collector agency won't work for me. I need to either get a settlement with them, or sue them, and then the judge will still expect us to settle. You can threaten with legal proceedings, but in the end, you're going to have to settle anyway. A lawsuit will merely drive up the cost for both parties.
I was really itching to sue them or send a debt collector after them, but in the end I just settled for about $1000 less than what they should have paid me. The time and money that a lawsuit would cost me just wasn't worth it, and there's no guarantee the debt collector would have gotten much more out of them. Sometimes you need to cut your losses. Fairness may just be too expensive. It was a valuable lesson.
Of course this was a Dutch situation. In other countries and across borders, it's bound to work completely differently.
No, stay professional. If they're not actively contesting the invoices, just neglecting to pay them, get a debt collection agency (no-cure no-ay if necessary) and send them after them. They may get your money for you, and if not, they may sue them for you.
In any case, don't get advice from random people online, get advice from lawyers and debt collectors who know about this sort of thing. Who know the relevant laws in your and their country, who know relevant treaties, etc.
But surely if you're a dev shop that has existed for more than a year, you already knew this.
Why is this Insightful? It's completely irrelevant! Not every call is automatically an international call, you know. Or is it currently impossible to call India from the US?
Hostility against Apple fans has reached a new height.
Too bad they're in the process of completely fucking up the ticket system. I used to be a fan of public transportation, but they're making it impossible for me now.
I like her about a million times better as Eurocommissioner than as a minister. She's seriously doing some really good stuff now, and is the only Eurocommissioner that I regularly hear something positive from.
Step 3 is "Get as much money out of the company as you can, and saddle it with debt". That's how Romney did it, and it looks like these people did pretty much the same thing. Bonus points for making the company loan the money with which you buy it.
Do you know why the money was gone? The executives took it. They got an 80% pay raise despite the looming bankruptcy. They were asking the workers to sacrifice in order to keep their golden goose alive, but didn't want to share any of the eggs.
In cases like this, ownership of the company should pass to the workers. They're the victims of the executives' greed.
Here it was the CEO twisting the arm and breaking it off. He got all the eggs from the golden goose, and out of greed, he killed it.
So it's okay for a single person pillaging a company to death just because his salary is a drop in the bucket compared to everything else? He's still enriching himself to a ridiculous degree at the cost to everybody else. Had he taken a pay cut like everybody else, he could have expected a lot more sympathy from his workers. If he keeps enriching himself while steering the company down the drain, he should expect his golden goose to die.
Yeah, blame it on the union, when in reality it was the executives who looted the company to death and asked the workers to foot the bill. It was intentional mismanagement, and the executives belong in prison.
The workers shut them down exactly because they had really terrible management. They don't kill their own job over nothing. They'd been betrayed, and the company had been looted by hedge funds and executives, who now had the temerity to ask the workers to pay for the executives' greed.
From what I understand, the company has been in trouble for 10 years. The workers already took a hefty pay cut. That money wasn't used to fix the company, but to give executives big raises (like 70-80%). And now they're asking the workers to take another pay cut so they can loot the company even more? Fuck them.
What we need is a law that in the case of intentional destructive mismanagement, workers who received a pay cut in the past get first claim to the company's assets. As it is, they get last claim (after banks and shareholders). Give them first claim, and the workers would be able to restart the company without the meddling of hedge funds and executives, and banks would demand that companies are run in a healthy manner, instead of looted like this.
Proportional representation in Congress.
If you think this is a way forward, you should think again. Open a couple of history books, look for countries that tried it and look how and why it failed.
Do you actually think before giving these advices?
I'd love to see an explanation of what you were thinking when you wrote this, because it doesn't seem to be making any sense.
Countries with proportional representation tend to be more democratic and have more dynamic democracies than countries with two-party systems. Two-party systems tend to polarize, and polarization tends to paralyze the politics of a country. Minority opinions don't get represented, and elections tend to degenerate to the choice for the lesser evil. Really, proportional representation is the way out.
The main way in which it's going to distinguish itself from other space sims is the usual: scale. It's going to have much more explorable stuff than any other game.
My biggest hope is that it's going to have procedurally generated unique, interesting alien civilizations filling the entire Milky Way.