Sure my formerly present HD was just fine, but unlike the TV I've had since I was in 3rd grade (some 30 odd years ago), my HDTV simply stopped working 3 years after I bought it. $900 to fix apparently, or get a new one for $700.
You're confusing two issues here: 1) autodiscovery - I agree with you, except 1) it helps only in limited quantity if each SoC out there does this (and does it differently), 2) we know from PCI & USB that better solutions exist. This probably needs to happen within ARM (as they own the AXI/AHB bus IP usually implemented), and as such ARM SoC HW designers are customers themselves with no control. Yes, ad hoc may be necessity for now, IF the right people know of the problem. 2) Hiding datasheets is an entirely separate issue. There are many reasons for this, most have to do with our "friends" over in China and other places whose labor costs are so low, and whose employment conditions are so horrid that they are a threat to the tremendous investment done in the western world. The traditional solution is to hide as much as possible, and force them to steal (which they do a lot) or recreate it. They then stay far enough behind that R&D costs are recouped. This usually ends up wrapped in legal agreements. It seems like an accelerometer is trivial to you, but there's probably a 100 person shop in california somewhere that spent a million or two to develop, harden and characterize it, and who may need 5 years to make that back.
Hardware doesn't always jive well with open-source. But again, Linus's particular concern probably could be resolved in several different ways and he may not care if the accelerometer support never shows up, as long as it's discovered cleanly and ignored rather than through mutually exclusive and abusive hacks.
The SW guys have a job to do in ensuring the the HW guys have proper requirements, it's not all just coding and committing.
I work at one of these ARM SOC companies, and the software guys complain an awful lot after the fact, but take almost no involvement in design reviews and architectural work for the hardware, and treat design reviews as optional. One guy is known for the mantra "We don't have time for reviews, do what you think is right and suffer the consequences". That may serve him well in software, but for hardware, particularly SoC's, it's far too expensive to change once manufactured.
I don't expect Linus, the Linux kernel maintainer, should be expected to worry about ARM issues, but he should make it clear to the SW developers who are, that shit stinks and he will hunt and kill firstborns until the problem is resolved. They at least are listening to his rant. Hardware guys are off trying to squeeze 10% more performance out of a memory bus or something, this is way too far out of their ivory tower to concern themselves with unless someone makes it an issue.
Well hardware designers do not have this problem and don't feel the pain. HW guys care a lot about performance, power and cost. How the thing is made to work by SW is not their problem.
Linus should be bitching at the SW guys involved to fix this problem. Threatening the HW guys with death, while in keeping with his idiom, will have no effect. They're not reading this.
He has always spoken this way to those who deserved it.
From his perspective. I would assert he has as little business talking about ARM SoC hardware designers about their design decisions as they have of telling him how to design an OS.
Anyone who has worked between chip and software teams knows the fights here are epic and unending.
No, I'm asserting that you and/or others are injecting some personal vendetta into the conversation by making statements like "The complaint we're talking about right now is that the presentation was a bullshit thing to allow into the conference in the first place, because featuring a "tit staring" app is so plainly rude that it has the effect of telling women to stay away."
My argument is simple: I don't necessarily, unequivocally, agree. I have presented a framework for what I will agree to, but through your name calling and obvious hostility, you have chosen to ignore this, in favor if righteous indignation, condescension and outright bully tactics. None of which strike me as the right sentiment for the topic. I will agree only that it is a rude topic that has no place in professional venues, and that contrary to expressed beliefs, most men would not tolerate this in that environment.
It is not obvious to me, as someone who doesn't attend TechCrunch that it's necessarily such an environment, and that women in attendance should have expected a sterile corporate environment. It seems like a conference that people can choose to attend or not, with no consequences, and thus it's TechCrunch's loss if women choose not to go in the future.
I don't know what is 6 sentences you are referring to, but I found the article full of statements like this:
"Titstare guys got a very loud applause from audience. Thank god sexism isn't alive and well in the tech sector. SO PROUD TO HAVE MY KID HERE," wrote Kim Jordan on Twitter sarcastically, the mother of the nine-year-old programmer Alexandra Jordan, who pitched a start-up app idea at the conference called
Quite clearly this implies that men in technology are sexist, which implies that we actively wish to alienate women. My response is that men are pigs, unrepentant pigs, we don't feel the slightest shame about it, nor ever will. But we have self control and most of us do not wish to alienate women or otherwise keep them barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. Most men would strongly disapprove of this and not tolerate it in the work place.
What's unclear to me is what kind of event this is. If these men are seriously selling a tit staring app then I suspect most women would elect not to work in their startup, but those who do have to accept a certain level of offense going in the door, it is a business that makes money (see above re: pigs). If this was a gag, as the article suggests then shame on them, unless TechCrunch set the wrong tone and implied such behavior is ok.
Fair enough, but someone wants to make the statement that all men condone apps like "titstare" or masturbation apps, and wrote an article that slashdot accepted.
Men aren't going to be outraged, offended or otherwise hostile about this sort of thing, particularly when it's used as an entertainment device. Laughing at it isn't condoning it either, if it's entertainment. But if this were in a professional setting I suspect most men would not even have laughed, and would have been very uncomfortable. I don't think the atmosphere these sorts of things create scream "professional", they seem to scream "lan party with code".
Yes, men staring at tits, talking about staring at tits, finding new ways to stare at tits, finding new tits to stare at, or rating tits is all a new thing, invented by the giant sausage factory that is technology development.
Normally men choose to do this without women around, I suspect that the lack of gender balance at these things tends to bring out the frat boy mentality that would otherwise be suppressed.
can pretty reliably figure out your general intelligence level by asking how bored you were in school, and if you had any friends
You can figure out how well adapted we were. I was bored and friendless in school because i knew the academic material from my parents (not because of intelligence, just because my parents were strict), and had an interesting enough life outside of school that it was just something "I had to do because it's the law". Over time this alienated me from my peers (as is inevitable when one is independent), and this created friction. My parents helpfully reminded me that the older I got the dregs would get separated away.
Except they were wrong. Capitalism needs the dregs, it ensures a constant demand for minimum wage, disposable employees. Yes, they mostly work for me, but that is irrelevant in the grander scheme of things. I need them now, my job depends on me NOT doing the work they do, but instead using them to accomplish it. I entirely missed out on that in school because i was isolated away. It is challenging to work with people who I share very little in common with.
I'm not arguing that "one size fits all" is a good thing, but I would suggest that there is a flip side. Getting along with a diverse set of people IS a critical skill that the vast majority of us cannot ever outgrow (i.e. we aren't rich enough).
It doesn't work here because a large number of people are actually entirely on-board. We're talking spying on american citizens awful peacefully. Perhaps Australians still have some dignity left to be outraged at losing.
People endorse me for skills that I have that I may not necessary want to be known for because they are less lucrative, or pigeon hole me in to a job role that is being offshored (i.e. board design/system engineering). Yet they are factual and I spent a hunk of my life doing those things. If the economy takes a dump perhaps I'd do those things again until I could find something with a future. But as with any career, what one did in the past is likely not what one wants to do in the future, and you shape that by targeting your resume and skills. It is factual, but of all the true things that can be said, only those few that serve the need are selected.
Generally I dislike the "endorse" feature, and the "recommendation" feature, it invites dishonesty and back scratching. I refuse to use either one.
I suspect that I could have truly bogus information, such as being the King of France, removed. I have not had that problem, most of my work acquaintances take this sort of thing seriously (unlike my facebook friends). Fortunate, as being guillotined isn't really good for growth.
Yes, yes, and we'll continue to use fake pictures, fake names, and build a profile of lies because they can't really stop that either.
Facebook is a worthless social tool, there's no reason to be honest. Meanwhile Linked-In is a repository of highly accurate data but it's not a lot of fun, nor does it have the mindshare facebook has. Facebook needs a new gig, it has a lot of viewers, it has very little useful facts and if pushed, they'll find it becomes increasingly factless.
American public schools are, in most cases, adequate to the task at hand. Everyone wants something tailored to the needs of their child, most people won't pay a single dime for it unless they government forces them to via taxes. That's where public school comes in.
What everyone forgets about education, be it public, private or individual tutors, is that the #1 driving factor is your child's interest level and desire to learn. If he or she is driven, they will learn even in adverse conditions. If he's a trouble-making brat? Well the private tutors may be able to drive more in there than a public school teacher with 40 students, but not enough to be worth talking about.
Having lived there, I don't see it. To me it's a self-supporting cycle: people want to live there because all the cool companies are there, the cool companies are there because technical people live there.
I think I'd be fine with Iowa, or better: Montana. It's beautiful, and there are seasons! But alas, we're seeing fewer tech hubs not more.
Even though promotions of technical positions to other technical positions are rare, don't exist in some companies, and frequently are for show. The salary band of "senior engineer" in most companies I've been in is incredibly wide, basically as wide as necessary to be able to hire desired people. There may be nowhere else to promote them...
This leadership thing is usually a message that they fill their company with H-1Bs, interns and offshore labor, and are looking to hire senior people to come in and bail them out of hot water. You're not going to do technical work, insofar as your job will be to utilize aforementioned labor to do that, your job is to tell them what to do. If that's how you want to practice your technical skill. That's the job requirement they're not telling you. As far as I'm concerned that is about the most miserable form of existence i've ever had to (briefly) endure. And yes, I know a particular hugely gigantic chip company that does exactly this and endured them.
The beauty is that we do all the work for them just by being our usual elitist snobby selves. I'm not sure how many people have been sent packing just because they don't know some piece of jargon or aren't familiar with the latest trends in some relatively ephemeral technological zeitgeist, in the hopes that Candidate will immediately become useful within the first week of employment.
Being a "VMWare/Windows Administrator" strikes me as relatively irrelevant compared to MS IT + 17 years, which should be enough to suggest that this person is competent in her field, and can learn to administrate just about anything, if she's motivated. But I'm sure if she doesn't know in the interview how to optimally configure a redundant VMware server, she's hopelessly lost... I mean that's like rocket science right there. Or something. We're not hiring people, we're hiring wikipedia pages, and due to all the jargon and groupthink, mostly vandalized wikipedia pages.
I'm not sure how this person plans to prove discrimination, I have no doubt (having been on interviews designed to hire H1Bs), that she was thrown into a ringer designed to make her look inferior to someone who got the questions ahead of time, and did the research ahead of time. The irony is that I've survived these interviews, fielding questions from database design to maxwell's equations applied to PCB designs, but the ultimate trump card is suddenly the job you're interviewing for is suddenly a more junior position, and suddenly the pay is less than what the job description might IMPLY (no salaries/grades given!). Then of course you say no and they hire the H1B anyway, because the qualified American wasn't interested. There's no winning. These people SHOULD be sued, I just lack the faith that they'll get what they deserve.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure my formerly present HD was just fine, but unlike the TV I've had since I was in 3rd grade (some 30 odd years ago), my HDTV simply stopped working 3 years after I bought it. $900 to fix apparently, or get a new one for $700.
they don't make em like they used to...
You're confusing two issues here:
1) autodiscovery - I agree with you, except 1) it helps only in limited quantity if each SoC out there does this (and does it differently), 2) we know from PCI & USB that better solutions exist. This probably needs to happen within ARM (as they own the AXI/AHB bus IP usually implemented), and as such ARM SoC HW designers are customers themselves with no control. Yes, ad hoc may be necessity for now, IF the right people know of the problem.
2) Hiding datasheets is an entirely separate issue. There are many reasons for this, most have to do with our "friends" over in China and other places whose labor costs are so low, and whose employment conditions are so horrid that they are a threat to the tremendous investment done in the western world. The traditional solution is to hide as much as possible, and force them to steal (which they do a lot) or recreate it. They then stay far enough behind that R&D costs are recouped. This usually ends up wrapped in legal agreements. It seems like an accelerometer is trivial to you, but there's probably a 100 person shop in california somewhere that spent a million or two to develop, harden and characterize it, and who may need 5 years to make that back.
Hardware doesn't always jive well with open-source. But again, Linus's particular concern probably could be resolved in several different ways and he may not care if the accelerometer support never shows up, as long as it's discovered cleanly and ignored rather than through mutually exclusive and abusive hacks.
The SW guys have a job to do in ensuring the the HW guys have proper requirements, it's not all just coding and committing.
I work at one of these ARM SOC companies, and the software guys complain an awful lot after the fact, but take almost no involvement in design reviews and architectural work for the hardware, and treat design reviews as optional. One guy is known for the mantra "We don't have time for reviews, do what you think is right and suffer the consequences". That may serve him well in software, but for hardware, particularly SoC's, it's far too expensive to change once manufactured.
I don't expect Linus, the Linux kernel maintainer, should be expected to worry about ARM issues, but he should make it clear to the SW developers who are, that shit stinks and he will hunt and kill firstborns until the problem is resolved. They at least are listening to his rant. Hardware guys are off trying to squeeze 10% more performance out of a memory bus or something, this is way too far out of their ivory tower to concern themselves with unless someone makes it an issue.
Well hardware designers do not have this problem and don't feel the pain. HW guys care a lot about performance, power and cost. How the thing is made to work by SW is not their problem.
Linus should be bitching at the SW guys involved to fix this problem. Threatening the HW guys with death, while in keeping with his idiom, will have no effect. They're not reading this.
He has always spoken this way to those who deserved it.
From his perspective. I would assert he has as little business talking about ARM SoC hardware designers about their design decisions as they have of telling him how to design an OS.
Anyone who has worked between chip and software teams knows the fights here are epic and unending.
No he's an entirely different kind of douche bag.
No, I'm asserting that you and/or others are injecting some personal vendetta into the conversation by making statements like "The complaint we're talking about right now is that the presentation was a bullshit thing to allow into the conference in the first place, because featuring a "tit staring" app is so plainly rude that it has the effect of telling women to stay away."
My argument is simple: I don't necessarily, unequivocally, agree. I have presented a framework for what I will agree to, but through your name calling and obvious hostility, you have chosen to ignore this, in favor if righteous indignation, condescension and outright bully tactics. None of which strike me as the right sentiment for the topic. I will agree only that it is a rude topic that has no place in professional venues, and that contrary to expressed beliefs, most men would not tolerate this in that environment.
It is not obvious to me, as someone who doesn't attend TechCrunch that it's necessarily such an environment, and that women in attendance should have expected a sterile corporate environment. It seems like a conference that people can choose to attend or not, with no consequences, and thus it's TechCrunch's loss if women choose not to go in the future.
I don't know what is 6 sentences you are referring to, but I found the article full of statements like this:
"Titstare guys got a very loud applause from audience. Thank god sexism isn't alive and well in the tech sector. SO PROUD TO HAVE MY KID HERE," wrote Kim Jordan on Twitter sarcastically, the mother of the nine-year-old programmer Alexandra Jordan, who pitched a start-up app idea at the conference called
Quite clearly this implies that men in technology are sexist, which implies that we actively wish to alienate women. My response is that men are pigs, unrepentant pigs, we don't feel the slightest shame about it, nor ever will. But we have self control and most of us do not wish to alienate women or otherwise keep them barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. Most men would strongly disapprove of this and not tolerate it in the work place.
What's unclear to me is what kind of event this is. If these men are seriously selling a tit staring app then I suspect most women would elect not to work in their startup, but those who do have to accept a certain level of offense going in the door, it is a business that makes money (see above re: pigs). If this was a gag, as the article suggests then shame on them, unless TechCrunch set the wrong tone and implied such behavior is ok.
Fair enough, but someone wants to make the statement that all men condone apps like "titstare" or masturbation apps, and wrote an article that slashdot accepted.
Men aren't going to be outraged, offended or otherwise hostile about this sort of thing, particularly when it's used as an entertainment device. Laughing at it isn't condoning it either, if it's entertainment. But if this were in a professional setting I suspect most men would not even have laughed, and would have been very uncomfortable. I don't think the atmosphere these sorts of things create scream "professional", they seem to scream "lan party with code".
Nonsense. This is an isolated incident.
Yes, men staring at tits, talking about staring at tits, finding new ways to stare at tits, finding new tits to stare at, or rating tits is all a new thing, invented by the giant sausage factory that is technology development.
Normally men choose to do this without women around, I suspect that the lack of gender balance at these things tends to bring out the frat boy mentality that would otherwise be suppressed.
can pretty reliably figure out your general intelligence level by asking how bored you were in school, and if you had any friends
You can figure out how well adapted we were. I was bored and friendless in school because i knew the academic material from my parents (not because of intelligence, just because my parents were strict), and had an interesting enough life outside of school that it was just something "I had to do because it's the law". Over time this alienated me from my peers (as is inevitable when one is independent), and this created friction. My parents helpfully reminded me that the older I got the dregs would get separated away.
Except they were wrong. Capitalism needs the dregs, it ensures a constant demand for minimum wage, disposable employees. Yes, they mostly work for me, but that is irrelevant in the grander scheme of things. I need them now, my job depends on me NOT doing the work they do, but instead using them to accomplish it. I entirely missed out on that in school because i was isolated away. It is challenging to work with people who I share very little in common with.
I'm not arguing that "one size fits all" is a good thing, but I would suggest that there is a flip side. Getting along with a diverse set of people IS a critical skill that the vast majority of us cannot ever outgrow (i.e. we aren't rich enough).
We can all participate in this research!
http://translationparty.com/
It doesn't work here because a large number of people are actually entirely on-board. We're talking spying on american citizens awful peacefully. Perhaps Australians still have some dignity left to be outraged at losing.
I suspect that, like most people on planet earth, what's good for Apple wasn't foremost on his mind.
Software patents are bad, just like most other patents. But, like genocide, there are those who may benefit.
People endorse me for skills that I have that I may not necessary want to be known for because they are less lucrative, or pigeon hole me in to a job role that is being offshored (i.e. board design/system engineering). Yet they are factual and I spent a hunk of my life doing those things. If the economy takes a dump perhaps I'd do those things again until I could find something with a future. But as with any career, what one did in the past is likely not what one wants to do in the future, and you shape that by targeting your resume and skills. It is factual, but of all the true things that can be said, only those few that serve the need are selected.
Generally I dislike the "endorse" feature, and the "recommendation" feature, it invites dishonesty and back scratching. I refuse to use either one.
I suspect that I could have truly bogus information, such as being the King of France, removed. I have not had that problem, most of my work acquaintances take this sort of thing seriously (unlike my facebook friends). Fortunate, as being guillotined isn't really good for growth.
Yes, yes, and we'll continue to use fake pictures, fake names, and build a profile of lies because they can't really stop that either.
Facebook is a worthless social tool, there's no reason to be honest. Meanwhile Linked-In is a repository of highly accurate data but it's not a lot of fun, nor does it have the mindshare facebook has. Facebook needs a new gig, it has a lot of viewers, it has very little useful facts and if pushed, they'll find it becomes increasingly factless.
American public schools are, in most cases, adequate to the task at hand. Everyone wants something tailored to the needs of their child, most people won't pay a single dime for it unless they government forces them to via taxes. That's where public school comes in.
What everyone forgets about education, be it public, private or individual tutors, is that the #1 driving factor is your child's interest level and desire to learn. If he or she is driven, they will learn even in adverse conditions. If he's a trouble-making brat? Well the private tutors may be able to drive more in there than a public school teacher with 40 students, but not enough to be worth talking about.
Having lived there, I don't see it. To me it's a self-supporting cycle: people want to live there because all the cool companies are there, the cool companies are there because technical people live there.
I think I'd be fine with Iowa, or better: Montana. It's beautiful, and there are seasons! But alas, we're seeing fewer tech hubs not more.
Nobody ever told them that deviating in the standard way isn't as much fun.
He's analyzed the economic climate and has a very forward looking view of employment conditions in the near future.
In other words, Ballmer was the symptom, not the problem.
There are programs out there that help you solve that problem.
So do a lot of oscilloscopes and logic analyzers.
Even though promotions of technical positions to other technical positions are rare, don't exist in some companies, and frequently are for show. The salary band of "senior engineer" in most companies I've been in is incredibly wide, basically as wide as necessary to be able to hire desired people. There may be nowhere else to promote them...
This leadership thing is usually a message that they fill their company with H-1Bs, interns and offshore labor, and are looking to hire senior people to come in and bail them out of hot water. You're not going to do technical work, insofar as your job will be to utilize aforementioned labor to do that, your job is to tell them what to do. If that's how you want to practice your technical skill. That's the job requirement they're not telling you. As far as I'm concerned that is about the most miserable form of existence i've ever had to (briefly) endure. And yes, I know a particular hugely gigantic chip company that does exactly this and endured them.
The beauty is that we do all the work for them just by being our usual elitist snobby selves. I'm not sure how many people have been sent packing just because they don't know some piece of jargon or aren't familiar with the latest trends in some relatively ephemeral technological zeitgeist, in the hopes that Candidate will immediately become useful within the first week of employment.
Being a "VMWare/Windows Administrator" strikes me as relatively irrelevant compared to MS IT + 17 years, which should be enough to suggest that this person is competent in her field, and can learn to administrate just about anything, if she's motivated. But I'm sure if she doesn't know in the interview how to optimally configure a redundant VMware server, she's hopelessly lost... I mean that's like rocket science right there. Or something. We're not hiring people, we're hiring wikipedia pages, and due to all the jargon and groupthink, mostly vandalized wikipedia pages.
I'm not sure how this person plans to prove discrimination, I have no doubt (having been on interviews designed to hire H1Bs), that she was thrown into a ringer designed to make her look inferior to someone who got the questions ahead of time, and did the research ahead of time. The irony is that I've survived these interviews, fielding questions from database design to maxwell's equations applied to PCB designs, but the ultimate trump card is suddenly the job you're interviewing for is suddenly a more junior position, and suddenly the pay is less than what the job description might IMPLY (no salaries/grades given!). Then of course you say no and they hire the H1B anyway, because the qualified American wasn't interested. There's no winning. These people SHOULD be sued, I just lack the faith that they'll get what they deserve.