"The same morons that helped the fucking taliban people with weapons in the 80's to fight against teh russians in afghanistan, or did you forget? The same bastards that trainned a guy so well it turns out to crush New York WTC in 2001."
Afghanistan served two purposes for us when the Soviets attacked them. First and foremost, it was to stop the Soviets from toppling country after country, and we succeeded here. Second, it was to show that Democracy beats Communism; we failed here because we did not follow up with anything. As for the 9/11 comment, do you mean our easily accessible schools? We trained Usama Bin Laden, not the people on the planes. Also, we didn't exactly train him to use planes to fly into buildings--that was his idea.
"Consequences of your democracy. Any way, your country is not a real democracy, since in your voting systems people's vote don't count at all. All the elections are based in the electoral college system and thus you don't get any real democracy in that system."
You're right, we're not a real democracy. Technically, we are a Republic.
The only position where direct voting does not hold a one-to-one result is that of the Presidency. Why? So one state cannot dominate an election; all other elections (Congress, and local/state level) are tallied and the majority wins. Instead, for the Presidential election, we have an Electoral College, which tallies its votes by state, which are given out by population. Most states require that the electoral college 'voters' follow the state's majority decision (i.e., if Bush gets 51% of the vote, and Kerry gets 49%, then Bush gets all of the electoral votes). It's pretty clear in our Constitution for the reasoning of this.
So you guys have a direct election of your leader, and the guy not in power won? Great, we had a turn-over of power similar to that when Thomas Jefferson was elected. Thanks for playing. So our election is still done on paper? Oh, well, we're cautiously moving towards electronic voting systems. The only people that complained about vote counting were people against the winner in VERY narrowly won areas. It's a legitimate practice and the fact that they CAN voice their concerns and be HEARD is an example of democracy, not a slap in its face.
As for the comment on Bush. That's just a shot (and you misspelled 'dumb'). To be honest, I'm more concerned with domestic problems than international issues. That's a side effect of living in the most powerful country in the world, and I realize that it comes off as selfish, but I don't regret feeling that way. I'm being honest. I care about Americans a lot more than Brazilians, or any other nation. Unless you guys send your military to attack us (futilely), then you don't effect me. The last big news I saw about Brazil was that you guys were pro-open source. I do not agree with everything Bush does, especially in terms of his spending (not so much on the military, but the general trend in high spending on other bloated areas of the government). I'm not against deficit spending, but I am against stupid deficit spending. I'm also against the recently proposed (and since rejected) to cut the budget in some areas that are ironically what you have been talking about (Medicare, student loans, etc); there are better areas to cut.
Anyway, you need to wake up and realize you don't know half as much about this country as you think you do. Everyone in America goes to K-12 public schools, OR BETTER, on tax payer money, until they are old enough to drop out, at which point it is their legal decision. Everyone that wants to go to college CAN through loans from private institutions (e.g., banks), extremely large amounts of scholarships (many with maximum income limits, to ensure they go to poor students rather than less-poor, or even rich students), and federal school loans. Also, it's illegal for hospitals to turn away people from getting medical care because they cannot afford it, or do not have insurance.
If I recall correctly, no country enjoys giving out its secrets to its greatest enemies. Maybe that's just me. No, it wasn't a nice thing to do, but it was the tactically correct thing to do and I would hope that we would do it again to any country in that situation (China seems to be having fun stealing our secrets, so hopefully we have issues there too).
A great product is a great product regardless of who makes it. I thought OSS was a big deal because it emphasised great engineering with openness. So, if you can't handle the heat, then stay out of the kitchen.
I think it's more telling that the paper shows Linux or FreeBSD as performing better in a few tests, which is the reason it was able to appear on the front page.
I'm happy though that MS may be taking Singularity seriously. Maybe we will see their OS in 2011-2015 based on it? Unless some sort of major shift in its purpose occurs, then I would definitely jump ship from whatever I am on then, to that and I will definitely port/develop my software for the OS.
Well, then I guess this shouldn't matter to you, but it definitely matters to Apple.
I will never purchase Mac OSX if I am forced to buy the hardware from Apple. I'm not paying $2,000+ for a $700- computer. Especially now that they are using commodity Intel hardware. It's not like they're doing anything special on it. At best, I think they may put a small encrypted chip on the motherboards to ensure you are using proprietary hardware (checked by the OS).
However, if I can buy Mac OSX stand-alone for around $200, then I would gladly do so; I have wanted to use Mac OSX for awhile, and I did consider buying a Powerbook for personal use, but they're just too little bang for too much buck when I can buy a Dell laptop and do all of my development on it AND use it for personal use (and with the Centrino, it is actually really fast--I wish they'd put these processors in PCs for a reasonable cost because that would give AMD a run for its money with a fast, extremely power efficient, low clock speed chip [just like AMD's compared to the P4]). I'd probably even buy a copy for my parents back home to use.
For the record, by the end of the year, I will have spent $970+ on Apple products (lots of iPods as gifts, and an iPod nano for myself). I have nothing against Apple and I recognize a good product by its cost/[personal] value ratio, not just brand. I know that Mac OSX is a good OS, and that's why I'd like to use it, but, again, I'm not spending thousands of dollars to replace something I already have that works perfectly fine (I'm also betting the PCs they offer will only be marginally better than my current PC, if they're even better).
I was a little disappointed though when I saw a copy of Mac OSX with the screen saver disabled (on a PowerBook during a presentation) that would throw up the Screensaver every 5 minutes, even though the energy saving settings and screen saver settings were set to Never; trying to set them to one hour did nothing. It was version 10.2*, so if anyone knows of a patch I can send this person, then please let me know.
They're not really the same things. You could disassemble/decompile/reverse-engineer for much different reasons that spyware research.
I think everyone agrees that spyware is against the best interests of a user, regardless of whether an EULA was displayed to them or not. At the same time, spyware research could be what the poster said--"I saw it on a friend's computer." It doesn't even really need to be researched, but then again, this is a court, so define "research."
I've seen so much spyware on my friends' computers that I can just see the EXE names and spot them now (though I google the exe name just in case they're anti-virus crap that is horriblely named). Now, I don't think that would be legitimate grounds for adding to a list of detected spyware, legally, but then again, why not? As long as I am not stiffling my competiton (anti-competitive) with this (i.e., Microsoft using their spyware detection to say Firefox is spyware), then isn't the product maker to say what fits their definition of spyware?
It will be interesting to see how this plays out though. It all depends on the judge. Is he an idiot? Or does he respect the fact that users should have the ability to make decisions for themselves (note: The EULA would probably prevent me from helping my friends remove their program, uh, legally). For that alone, this case should be dismissed and the EULA forced to remove that clause.
They do make clocks that are more accurate than others (maybe not Timex, but some do) and they could know for sometime in advance how long these shifts are and when they would be. If we are skipping seconds, then 24 hours, 60 minutes, 60 seconds would be wrong the instance after any such skip (though, only by one second). Still, add a few seconds and it starts to really matter in business transactions (stocks) and other similar things (military intel from satellites).
Really, the implications are pretty big. A second doesn't seem like much, but I mean, we have atomic-clocks around for a reason.
Yes, but you are missing the twist, which is why I added the part about "not the actual backstory, just the effects." The reason they got so big in storage was because they stole IBM's mainframe designs and spawned the storage business as a side business. After IBM redesigned its mainframes, they lost their [9%] stake in that business, but held onto storage.
Basically, what I am saying is that one producted spawned another business, or in this case, reinvigerated another.
Reminds me of how Hitachi became so big in the mass storage business (not the actual backstory, just the effects).
Still though, I don't see the trend as continuing; I love my iPod (even though it is a scratched up Nano), but I don't have any tingling urge to buy a Mac.
Then again, I'm kind of crazy when it comes to my purchases, so I may just be an anomaly. Who really knows?
I saw that, but I really don't buy it (no pun intended). After all, we are investing in this very invention's competition (which may be the problem in some cases, because they want to pick THEIR creation as the winner instead of looking like idiots that spent billions on something less effective, but I hope there is some other more legitimate reason). Not to mention we are investing heavily (and putting weight on companies to invest) in hydrogen to avoid our reliance on oil/gas.
It's not like these would even be likely to replace car engines any sooner than hydrogen (pure) powered engines will, as they're already in prototype, while this isn't even out of concept.
The fact that NASA invested in it, and then shunned it really makes me wonder about the factual nature of the article. Of course, NASA has been seen to do some stupid stuff in recent history, especially in terms of wasteful spending.
I don't see why though, since he only needs $1.5 - $2 million dollars. With all the money we throw at such horrible research, why the NSF can't throw $2 million this way is beyond me.
Who knows? Maybe it's literally too good to be true and scientists that know the lingo, know it?
Excuse me, I paid for college. So take your incredible ignorance somewhere else.
People without a SS die waiting for proper care? Are you kidding me? We pump billions of dollars into the medical system to COVER money lost from treating illegal aliens (READ: PEOPLE WITHOUT SS). As a matter of fact, it's such a problem that there was a bill in congress specifically for paying for it.
It's fine if you want to just accept what you see one the news as fact, and, as such, I guess I can start assuming everyone in the middle east/south asian countries are all a bunch of ignorant morons that agree with terrorism who live in the stone age and throw spears at [U.S.] helicopters when they bring in aid [Tsunami Relief done by Pakistani or Indian villages, just in case you were wondering]? I see that on the news all the time.
By the way, "democracy" does not mean anything in terms of basic medical and higher education; it may LEAD to such protections, but that is because you have ADDED onto democracy. The government serves to protect (military) and organize (government/basic education), it does not have an obligation to save every individual with medical benefits or give us an education beyond our basic needs (though we DO have Medicare and tons of Federal College Loans). That's why we have the best nation in the world. We recognize self-worth; not everything we do or get is handed to us on silver platter. You must EARN something or else you should probably be in some other country, receiving half-assed medical care from half-assed physicians with half-assed wages (but admittedly, nice vacations). Why does ANYONE with a problem come to America for medical care? Our doctors are the best, that's why. Even in England, they have their public hospitals, which are terrible, and then they have private hospitals, which anyone that can afford it goes too.
Are there people born into a little bit of power, or have an easier life than some of the others? Of course. Every country has that issue, and it's only an issue because people like you envy those people. I have no problem with it. They lucked out. They won the lottery at birth. Big deal, now prove to the world why that should have been you.
Actually, one of the interesting things about LINQ is that it is not necessary to link it to SQL. It can be up against XML, or SQL, and I think a few other schemes (may even plainly linear arrays?).
My only problem with LINQ is the implementation of the var keyword and idea. Yes, it is dynamically linked to the proper data type at runtime, but with the inclusion of templates ("generics") in C# 2.0, then in C# 3.0, the var should be a generic and STATED as such, or else it should be plainly, and strongly typed as an ordinary loop would require in C# 1.0. This is just a technicality though because at the end of the day I assume the compiler is probably implementing some sort of generic's scheme for you if you use var (since you CAN use a strongly typed variable if you want).
I actually meant to put $5,000, but I apparently hit the 4. Oh well. Also, you only get $4,500, as opposed to just $500, if you are deemed to have completed the project.
It makes very little difference to me since at my last summer programming internship I made quite a bit more than $5,000.
Also, it's not the government's fault that college is more expensive here than in other countries because, for the most part, our colleges are much better and we, as a nation, do not pay higher taxes to put everyone through college, including those that do not deserve or need it.
The last part about Google paying for school is totally bogus. The Summer of Code paid less than $4,000, which would not even get a person through one semester of college. If you want to pay for college, then you definitely were not doing the Summer of Code BS, but if you wanted to do something neat and maybe cool, plus get paid a little bit for it, then do Summer of Code.
Since they'll be making the initial drives, then I can only imagine that this may find itself as part of the real driver for it, or at least enable it to ease its way onto our computers some other way (probably their movies).
Oh, and screw purchasing a PS3. Sony wants to screw the consumer, then screw them. I never really did like Sony, but this is just another good reason.
I could see it now: I'm having surgery performed and the doctor is beside me trying to keep up with the beat to his music, which is causing him to vibrate slightly, cutting one of my arteries. It's cool though, because he was probably listening to "Scars" by Papa Roach.
Well, actually, it means a lot because of how they are brandishing the product as pro-environment compared to existing hydrogen models that derive their fuels from a less green provider (methenol with CO2). In other words, they are probably doing just as much environmental damage to get the hydrogen as the others, but when YOU use it, the process has already occured, which I'd guess makes it more efficient, but not quite so truly "greener."
Nuclear power reactors don't currently have hydrogren as a byproduct.
This will change around 2020 when, the company who I used to work for, has their prototype reactor purchased (expected date). Unfortunately, the reactor isn't as powerful as some of the current ones out there, so the demand won't be high unless they can really push out the hydrogen, which was actually a minor problem when I left (in terms of quantity without costing too much energy). Of course, the have about 5-10 more years of development to go.
That was because the kid messed with Visual Basic, having no idea what was being grouped with what, and how.
Using an IDE to program for you will NEVER give you a grasp of programming. Cookie cutter tools will create cookies. If you then build on TOP of those tools, then you can quickly implement SOME very simple-but-elegant interfaces in short periods of time.
Also, VS does not prevent you from implementing advanced interfaces (your own advanced controls).
I mean, hell, id Software even releases its source code [e.g., Quake anyone?] with VS project files. Any big Windows product probably uses VS.
Drag-and-drop has its place. It accelerates development on things that really shouldn't be taking you time. I don't need to WASTE my time coding a dialog button over and over again, when I can just drop it in and have the IDE plug in the code for me. Now, if I did not understand how the IDE was mapping the object creation and the event handling, then yes, I agree that that is partly dangerous. At the same time, if I were a beginner, I no longer need to know, or more to the point, care what is happening. As long as the IDE is putting it into an efficient form (which it does, in the case of.NET, all controls get created in the "Initialization" function), then why should we care once we know what happens? It's a waste of time.
The understanding of what is happening behind the scenes (automatic code creation, which not only is the wave of the future, but is also a very good way to avoid errors in rudimentary code) can and should be taught in introductory programming courses and books, which I would hope anyone picking up coding would take or read. Automatic code creation leads to a quicker understanding of the basics, once the code creation is explained, even in C++. It's all moot though, if you don't understand the syntax (which seems like it would be a problem with the kid).
Why is your friend's son becoming a better programmer? Because he is being taught how to be one. It has nothing to do with the IDE (as a matter of fact, I would say using Eclipse is a negative and I have always found its interface to be a bit less than intuitive, but I realize I'm in a minority here). Really though, experience is the key fundamental to most programmer's success. He probably would have eventually gotten annoyed with making tiny little VB apps and would have branched off to either something more advanced that would require a deeper understanding so that he would find it, or simply jumped to another language, which would have more obviously linked his GUIs to code (since prior to VB.NET, VB did not really show you where the GUI was being set up in terms of code, but you could see that information by opening the *.frm file in a text reader).
Slashdot Mirror
The only position where direct voting does not hold a one-to-one result is that of the Presidency. Why? So one state cannot dominate an election; all other elections (Congress, and local/state level) are tallied and the majority wins. Instead, for the Presidential election, we have an Electoral College, which tallies its votes by state, which are given out by population. Most states require that the electoral college 'voters' follow the state's majority decision (i.e., if Bush gets 51% of the vote, and Kerry gets 49%, then Bush gets all of the electoral votes). It's pretty clear in our Constitution for the reasoning of this.
So you guys have a direct election of your leader, and the guy not in power won? Great, we had a turn-over of power similar to that when Thomas Jefferson was elected. Thanks for playing. So our election is still done on paper? Oh, well, we're cautiously moving towards electronic voting systems. The only people that complained about vote counting were people against the winner in VERY narrowly won areas. It's a legitimate practice and the fact that they CAN voice their concerns and be HEARD is an example of democracy, not a slap in its face.
As for the comment on Bush. That's just a shot (and you misspelled 'dumb'). To be honest, I'm more concerned with domestic problems than international issues. That's a side effect of living in the most powerful country in the world, and I realize that it comes off as selfish, but I don't regret feeling that way. I'm being honest. I care about Americans a lot more than Brazilians, or any other nation. Unless you guys send your military to attack us (futilely), then you don't effect me. The last big news I saw about Brazil was that you guys were pro-open source. I do not agree with everything Bush does, especially in terms of his spending (not so much on the military, but the general trend in high spending on other bloated areas of the government). I'm not against deficit spending, but I am against stupid deficit spending. I'm also against the recently proposed (and since rejected) to cut the budget in some areas that are ironically what you have been talking about (Medicare, student loans, etc); there are better areas to cut.
Anyway, you need to wake up and realize you don't know half as much about this country as you think you do. Everyone in America goes to K-12 public schools, OR BETTER, on tax payer money, until they are old enough to drop out, at which point it is their legal decision. Everyone that wants to go to college CAN through loans from private institutions (e.g., banks), extremely large amounts of scholarships (many with maximum income limits, to ensure they go to poor students rather than less-poor, or even rich students), and federal school loans. Also, it's illegal for hospitals to turn away people from getting medical care because they cannot afford it, or do not have insurance.
If I recall correctly, no country enjoys giving out its secrets to its greatest enemies. Maybe that's just me. No, it wasn't a nice thing to do, but it was the tactically correct thing to do and I would hope that we would do it again to any country in that situation (China seems to be having fun stealing our secrets, so hopefully we have issues there too).
A great product is a great product regardless of who makes it. I thought OSS was a big deal because it emphasised great engineering with openness. So, if you can't handle the heat, then stay out of the kitchen.
I'm happy though that MS may be taking Singularity seriously. Maybe we will see their OS in 2011-2015 based on it? Unless some sort of major shift in its purpose occurs, then I would definitely jump ship from whatever I am on then, to that and I will definitely port/develop my software for the OS.
I will never purchase Mac OSX if I am forced to buy the hardware from Apple. I'm not paying $2,000+ for a $700- computer. Especially now that they are using commodity Intel hardware. It's not like they're doing anything special on it. At best, I think they may put a small encrypted chip on the motherboards to ensure you are using proprietary hardware (checked by the OS).
However, if I can buy Mac OSX stand-alone for around $200, then I would gladly do so; I have wanted to use Mac OSX for awhile, and I did consider buying a Powerbook for personal use, but they're just too little bang for too much buck when I can buy a Dell laptop and do all of my development on it AND use it for personal use (and with the Centrino, it is actually really fast--I wish they'd put these processors in PCs for a reasonable cost because that would give AMD a run for its money with a fast, extremely power efficient, low clock speed chip [just like AMD's compared to the P4]). I'd probably even buy a copy for my parents back home to use.
For the record, by the end of the year, I will have spent $970+ on Apple products (lots of iPods as gifts, and an iPod nano for myself). I have nothing against Apple and I recognize a good product by its cost/[personal] value ratio, not just brand. I know that Mac OSX is a good OS, and that's why I'd like to use it, but, again, I'm not spending thousands of dollars to replace something I already have that works perfectly fine (I'm also betting the PCs they offer will only be marginally better than my current PC, if they're even better).
I was a little disappointed though when I saw a copy of Mac OSX with the screen saver disabled (on a PowerBook during a presentation) that would throw up the Screensaver every 5 minutes, even though the energy saving settings and screen saver settings were set to Never; trying to set them to one hour did nothing. It was version 10.2*, so if anyone knows of a patch I can send this person, then please let me know.
I think everyone agrees that spyware is against the best interests of a user, regardless of whether an EULA was displayed to them or not. At the same time, spyware research could be what the poster said--"I saw it on a friend's computer." It doesn't even really need to be researched, but then again, this is a court, so define "research."
I've seen so much spyware on my friends' computers that I can just see the EXE names and spot them now (though I google the exe name just in case they're anti-virus crap that is horriblely named). Now, I don't think that would be legitimate grounds for adding to a list of detected spyware, legally, but then again, why not? As long as I am not stiffling my competiton (anti-competitive) with this (i.e., Microsoft using their spyware detection to say Firefox is spyware), then isn't the product maker to say what fits their definition of spyware?
It will be interesting to see how this plays out though. It all depends on the judge. Is he an idiot? Or does he respect the fact that users should have the ability to make decisions for themselves (note: The EULA would probably prevent me from helping my friends remove their program, uh, legally). For that alone, this case should be dismissed and the EULA forced to remove that clause.
Really, the implications are pretty big. A second doesn't seem like much, but I mean, we have atomic-clocks around for a reason.
Time to buy a new watch if this goes into effect!
Basically, what I am saying is that one producted spawned another business, or in this case, reinvigerated another.
Will the ink refilling industry be as big here as in traditional printers?
Still though, I don't see the trend as continuing; I love my iPod (even though it is a scratched up Nano), but I don't have any tingling urge to buy a Mac.
Then again, I'm kind of crazy when it comes to my purchases, so I may just be an anomaly. Who really knows?
Just add to each one, past "Primary/Secondary Schooling," "and you are willing to pay-out-the-wazoo for it [in the US]."
It's not like these would even be likely to replace car engines any sooner than hydrogen (pure) powered engines will, as they're already in prototype, while this isn't even out of concept.
The fact that NASA invested in it, and then shunned it really makes me wonder about the factual nature of the article. Of course, NASA has been seen to do some stupid stuff in recent history, especially in terms of wasteful spending.
Way to try and take a snap shot, and show it as the big picture.
I don't see why though, since he only needs $1.5 - $2 million dollars. With all the money we throw at such horrible research, why the NSF can't throw $2 million this way is beyond me.
Who knows? Maybe it's literally too good to be true and scientists that know the lingo, know it?
People without a SS die waiting for proper care? Are you kidding me? We pump billions of dollars into the medical system to COVER money lost from treating illegal aliens (READ: PEOPLE WITHOUT SS). As a matter of fact, it's such a problem that there was a bill in congress specifically for paying for it.
It's fine if you want to just accept what you see one the news as fact, and, as such, I guess I can start assuming everyone in the middle east/south asian countries are all a bunch of ignorant morons that agree with terrorism who live in the stone age and throw spears at [U.S.] helicopters when they bring in aid [Tsunami Relief done by Pakistani or Indian villages, just in case you were wondering]? I see that on the news all the time.
By the way, "democracy" does not mean anything in terms of basic medical and higher education; it may LEAD to such protections, but that is because you have ADDED onto democracy. The government serves to protect (military) and organize (government/basic education), it does not have an obligation to save every individual with medical benefits or give us an education beyond our basic needs (though we DO have Medicare and tons of Federal College Loans). That's why we have the best nation in the world. We recognize self-worth; not everything we do or get is handed to us on silver platter. You must EARN something or else you should probably be in some other country, receiving half-assed medical care from half-assed physicians with half-assed wages (but admittedly, nice vacations). Why does ANYONE with a problem come to America for medical care? Our doctors are the best, that's why. Even in England, they have their public hospitals, which are terrible, and then they have private hospitals, which anyone that can afford it goes too.
Are there people born into a little bit of power, or have an easier life than some of the others? Of course. Every country has that issue, and it's only an issue because people like you envy those people. I have no problem with it. They lucked out. They won the lottery at birth. Big deal, now prove to the world why that should have been you.
Thanks for the laughs.
My only problem with LINQ is the implementation of the var keyword and idea. Yes, it is dynamically linked to the proper data type at runtime, but with the inclusion of templates ("generics") in C# 2.0, then in C# 3.0, the var should be a generic and STATED as such, or else it should be plainly, and strongly typed as an ordinary loop would require in C# 1.0. This is just a technicality though because at the end of the day I assume the compiler is probably implementing some sort of generic's scheme for you if you use var (since you CAN use a strongly typed variable if you want).
It makes very little difference to me since at my last summer programming internship I made quite a bit more than $5,000.
Also, it's not the government's fault that college is more expensive here than in other countries because, for the most part, our colleges are much better and we, as a nation, do not pay higher taxes to put everyone through college, including those that do not deserve or need it.
The last part about Google paying for school is totally bogus. The Summer of Code paid less than $4,000, which would not even get a person through one semester of college. If you want to pay for college, then you definitely were not doing the Summer of Code BS, but if you wanted to do something neat and maybe cool, plus get paid a little bit for it, then do Summer of Code.
Oh, and screw purchasing a PS3. Sony wants to screw the consumer, then screw them. I never really did like Sony, but this is just another good reason.
I'm sorry, you're on the wrong site to show that Microsoft may in fact be innovative.
I could see it now: I'm having surgery performed and the doctor is beside me trying to keep up with the beat to his music, which is causing him to vibrate slightly, cutting one of my arteries. It's cool though, because he was probably listening to "Scars" by Papa Roach.
Well, actually, it means a lot because of how they are brandishing the product as pro-environment compared to existing hydrogen models that derive their fuels from a less green provider (methenol with CO2). In other words, they are probably doing just as much environmental damage to get the hydrogen as the others, but when YOU use it, the process has already occured, which I'd guess makes it more efficient, but not quite so truly "greener."
This will change around 2020 when, the company who I used to work for, has their prototype reactor purchased (expected date). Unfortunately, the reactor isn't as powerful as some of the current ones out there, so the demand won't be high unless they can really push out the hydrogen, which was actually a minor problem when I left (in terms of quantity without costing too much energy). Of course, the have about 5-10 more years of development to go.
Using an IDE to program for you will NEVER give you a grasp of programming. Cookie cutter tools will create cookies. If you then build on TOP of those tools, then you can quickly implement SOME very simple-but-elegant interfaces in short periods of time.
Also, VS does not prevent you from implementing advanced interfaces (your own advanced controls).
I mean, hell, id Software even releases its source code [e.g., Quake anyone?] with VS project files. Any big Windows product probably uses VS.
Drag-and-drop has its place. It accelerates development on things that really shouldn't be taking you time. I don't need to WASTE my time coding a dialog button over and over again, when I can just drop it in and have the IDE plug in the code for me. Now, if I did not understand how the IDE was mapping the object creation and the event handling, then yes, I agree that that is partly dangerous. At the same time, if I were a beginner, I no longer need to know, or more to the point, care what is happening. As long as the IDE is putting it into an efficient form (which it does, in the case of .NET, all controls get created in the "Initialization" function), then why should we care once we know what happens? It's a waste of time.
The understanding of what is happening behind the scenes (automatic code creation, which not only is the wave of the future, but is also a very good way to avoid errors in rudimentary code) can and should be taught in introductory programming courses and books, which I would hope anyone picking up coding would take or read. Automatic code creation leads to a quicker understanding of the basics, once the code creation is explained, even in C++. It's all moot though, if you don't understand the syntax (which seems like it would be a problem with the kid).
Why is your friend's son becoming a better programmer? Because he is being taught how to be one. It has nothing to do with the IDE (as a matter of fact, I would say using Eclipse is a negative and I have always found its interface to be a bit less than intuitive, but I realize I'm in a minority here). Really though, experience is the key fundamental to most programmer's success. He probably would have eventually gotten annoyed with making tiny little VB apps and would have branched off to either something more advanced that would require a deeper understanding so that he would find it, or simply jumped to another language, which would have more obviously linked his GUIs to code (since prior to VB.NET, VB did not really show you where the GUI was being set up in terms of code, but you could see that information by opening the *.frm file in a text reader).