I think there's nothing wrong with deregulation of the power industry, or any other industry for that matter. There is something wrong with unsrupulous profiteering, however. So perhaps the answer is to deregulate industry but regulate profiteering.
Also I think there is enough of a difference between the meanings of deregulation and privatization that the distinction should be made clear. I for one will vote against any politician who auctions off our assets.
What's wrong with bad coding blowing up at runtime?
Java's dichotomy between objects and primitive types is a defining characteristic, there's no need to cover its nakedness.
From my C++ experience, genericity equals CRAPPY PERFORMANCE in time and space. Any thoughts about that?
Enums are cool, but given the cosmetic nature of the other changes (Avon calling), I am skeptical.
I read "Effective Java" and it contains one of my pet peeves. To paraphrase: "Don't waste your time trying to write better versions of library methods. The library programmers are way ahead of you and more competent in the first place. Just wait until they fix the current version." Fallacious and insulting.
Perfection is not when nothing more can be added, but when nothing more can be taken away.
Check out Michael Jackson's "Software requirements & specifications:a lexicon of practice, principles and prejudices." There is a chapter entitled "Deskilling." I think it addresses the issues you raise.
Slashdot Mirror
Also I think there is enough of a difference between the meanings of deregulation and privatization that the distinction should be made clear. I for one will vote against any politician who auctions off our assets.
Oberon
What's wrong with bad coding blowing up at runtime? Java's dichotomy between objects and primitive types is a defining characteristic, there's no need to cover its nakedness. From my C++ experience, genericity equals CRAPPY PERFORMANCE in time and space. Any thoughts about that? Enums are cool, but given the cosmetic nature of the other changes (Avon calling), I am skeptical. I read "Effective Java" and it contains one of my pet peeves. To paraphrase: "Don't waste your time trying to write better versions of library methods. The library programmers are way ahead of you and more competent in the first place. Just wait until they fix the current version." Fallacious and insulting. Perfection is not when nothing more can be added, but when nothing more can be taken away.
It seems that by this argument that the ballot box is the least secure of all methods.
Since we are told that conspiracies don't exist then this cannot be a hoax. It is impossible that the secret was kept this long.
Check out Michael Jackson's "Software requirements & specifications:a lexicon of practice, principles and prejudices." There is a chapter entitled "Deskilling." I think it addresses the issues you raise.