1. The three stooges "Shut up you numbskull" patent
2. The whack dat nois - e boid patent
3. The void-your-manufacturer-warranty inoportune phonecall patent
Whatever man. I'm more than happy with your "rejects".
Yes, 1+1=2. 2+2=4. 4+4=8. Except when it comes to resources. 1 resources that is 10 times as good, is worth more than 100 resources at 1/10th of their ability. At least with the 1 resource, you don't need the QA to weed out the crap that doesn't work, and over time you don't accumulate anywhere near the amount of code debt.
But then again, I guess I'm responding to an Ivy league graduate.;)
I have to say that the AC GP post is pure weapons grade baloneyum, and I suspect we both may have just fed a troll.
The typist argument is a bit of a strawman, as most people can easily type, and the quality/recognition of the quality of the product is pretty self apparent. A more apt comparison would be to compare building a website, to building a shed. Sure, you can do it yourself, and if you're a handyman, it might look kinda good. But generally it won't come in at the level of quality, or at the real cost (if you yourself are worth anthing, your time is not free) of a seasoned professional who does it day in and day out.
Building software as a programmer in this analogy starts at building a house. How successful do you think the average person would be at that? And for the really big enterprise projects, you're talking a skyscraper. We even have similar roles such as Architect, Developer, Quality Assurance, Project Manager etc. for an undertaking of that size.
I think the people who believe that software engineering will disappear are the same ivy league management graduates who think that shipping work off overseas to be done by teams of monkeys on typewriters in a sweatshop to reduce costs on what they see as a non-revenue generating, but somehow magically essential to the company service as equivalent in quality, and yet cheaper in overall price. Most companies who are doing this, learn the hard truth on the bottom line, or miss it completely and just mysteriously feel it in their wallets.
To the person asking the question about the industry, it's simple. Do interesting projects. Money will come with talent. Unless if you are in a team, with some really good and/or experienced people who can clean up your rubbish, and hopefully that you will learn from as well, your first few projects will fail. We've all been there. Don't be afraid to do so. Like a friend of mine always says, Silicon Valley was built upon the bones of failure, just don't let them be your bones.
I have yet to meet a woman that finds big balls a turn on. As a man, you need big balls in the metaphorical rather than literal sense. The *real* question is, does it make you infertile over time.
Good to see that someone truly understands the prisoner's dillemma. On the whole in society, it's best to always choose what's best for everyone and not best for you, but if you come across a group like this, it makes perfect sense to single them out and punish them. I really wish more corporates, companies and people did this. It would really help to diminish the amount of successful selfish people in the world.
I loved that bit where William Shatner was trying just a *little* tiny bit of coke on the tip of his tongue from list little finger, looks up and with strong authority says, yeah, it's coke. Robert de Niro walks past casually and says, yeah, unless if it's cyanide powder, in which case you're dead. There's a reason why we don't stick the contents of random powders into our mouths.
For all of its shortcomings, Actionscript 3 really is a good language. I know, it's heresy to utter such things in slashdot, but we really will see less software, at a lower quality emerging from organisations with HTML5. Why? Because it costs more time and skill, and thus more money to develop the same stuff.
I must be part of the crusty old geek category too my friend. But it's not just the basic OO principles that are out the window. Have you looked into traits? The basic paradigm is, why not let the user implement their interfaces, you know, like an abstract class, but still allow for multiple inheritance. It's like these guys have never heard of the Deadly Diamond of Doom. It was further confirmed to me when I was at a conference with one of these guys, and when I asked the speaker about it, he looked at me puzzled and fired up wikipedia.
Oh well. At least we'll know some good answers when the pendulum swings back again.
I think it comes down to the serious question of how much you are going to use it. For an online ordering system where you are only interesting in placing an order once every few months/years, such as business cards or something along those lines, you'd want a web experience. For something like timesheets which you use every day/multiple times a day, a desktop deploy is warranted.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure that Encyclopedia Britanica has an "alter encyclopedia entry" item in their shopping cart too.
I don't think it's so much that this is the first time in history that history can be bought. It's probably more of a discussion on the price.
Yeah! How do you like THEM apples?!?
Shut off internet access to all those countries and see how fucking happy the ignorant and uneducated masses are then
Their governments would more than likely be delighted.
1. The three stooges "Shut up you numbskull" patent
2. The whack dat nois - e boid patent
3. The void-your-manufacturer-warranty inoportune phonecall patent
Conveniently, that's where global warming comes in!
Whatever man. I'm more than happy with your "rejects".
Yes, 1+1=2. 2+2=4. 4+4=8. Except when it comes to resources. 1 resources that is 10 times as good, is worth more than 100 resources at 1/10th of their ability. At least with the 1 resource, you don't need the QA to weed out the crap that doesn't work, and over time you don't accumulate anywhere near the amount of code debt.
;)
But then again, I guess I'm responding to an Ivy league graduate.
I have to say that the AC GP post is pure weapons grade baloneyum, and I suspect we both may have just fed a troll.
The typist argument is a bit of a strawman, as most people can easily type, and the quality/recognition of the quality of the product is pretty self apparent. A more apt comparison would be to compare building a website, to building a shed. Sure, you can do it yourself, and if you're a handyman, it might look kinda good. But generally it won't come in at the level of quality, or at the real cost (if you yourself are worth anthing, your time is not free) of a seasoned professional who does it day in and day out.
Building software as a programmer in this analogy starts at building a house. How successful do you think the average person would be at that? And for the really big enterprise projects, you're talking a skyscraper. We even have similar roles such as Architect, Developer, Quality Assurance, Project Manager etc. for an undertaking of that size.
I think the people who believe that software engineering will disappear are the same ivy league management graduates who think that shipping work off overseas to be done by teams of monkeys on typewriters in a sweatshop to reduce costs on what they see as a non-revenue generating, but somehow magically essential to the company service as equivalent in quality, and yet cheaper in overall price. Most companies who are doing this, learn the hard truth on the bottom line, or miss it completely and just mysteriously feel it in their wallets.
To the person asking the question about the industry, it's simple. Do interesting projects. Money will come with talent. Unless if you are in a team, with some really good and/or experienced people who can clean up your rubbish, and hopefully that you will learn from as well, your first few projects will fail. We've all been there. Don't be afraid to do so. Like a friend of mine always says, Silicon Valley was built upon the bones of failure, just don't let them be your bones.
Thanks for bringing that into focus.
Looks like the KKK renamed their acronym to something more paletable.
I have yet to meet a woman that finds big balls a turn on. As a man, you need big balls in the metaphorical rather than literal sense. The *real* question is, does it make you infertile over time.
facepalm
Is understanding the difference between an estimate, and vision on a problem.
I'm more wondering what it would be like for the driver who actually rear ended a robotic vehicle
Uh, yeah, so I rear ended you. We should exchange insurance details.
I'm sorry, Dave, but I can't do that.
Liquidity is good, but nobody needs their cash in microseconds.
Heh heh, I read that as Liquidity is good, but nobody needs their crash in microseconds.
Made in North Korea?!? What the...
Still cheaper than SMS
Good to see that someone truly understands the prisoner's dillemma. On the whole in society, it's best to always choose what's best for everyone and not best for you, but if you come across a group like this, it makes perfect sense to single them out and punish them. I really wish more corporates, companies and people did this. It would really help to diminish the amount of successful selfish people in the world.
I loved that bit where William Shatner was trying just a *little* tiny bit of coke on the tip of his tongue from list little finger, looks up and with strong authority says, yeah, it's coke. Robert de Niro walks past casually and says, yeah, unless if it's cyanide powder, in which case you're dead. There's a reason why we don't stick the contents of random powders into our mouths.
so I suspect they were including the removal of the penis
And IT guys thought they had to make sacrifices for their careers!
Pong death showdown anyone?
No, the kitchen stove is in the part of the cave they haven't visited yet.
It involves a gun, and the developer's address.
Flash is also, to be perfectly honest
For all of its shortcomings, Actionscript 3 really is a good language. I know, it's heresy to utter such things in slashdot, but we really will see less software, at a lower quality emerging from organisations with HTML5. Why? Because it costs more time and skill, and thus more money to develop the same stuff.
I must be part of the crusty old geek category too my friend. But it's not just the basic OO principles that are out the window. Have you looked into traits? The basic paradigm is, why not let the user implement their interfaces, you know, like an abstract class, but still allow for multiple inheritance. It's like these guys have never heard of the Deadly Diamond of Doom. It was further confirmed to me when I was at a conference with one of these guys, and when I asked the speaker about it, he looked at me puzzled and fired up wikipedia.
Oh well. At least we'll know some good answers when the pendulum swings back again.
I think it comes down to the serious question of how much you are going to use it. For an online ordering system where you are only interesting in placing an order once every few months/years, such as business cards or something along those lines, you'd want a web experience. For something like timesheets which you use every day/multiple times a day, a desktop deploy is warranted.