Why are companies allowed to sit on patents and wait for someone to come allong and violate it? Why aren't they forced to A) license it or B) to implement it? (If they choose neither then the patent should expire.)
"so that any developer can jump into any part of a project and be able to figure out what's going on, without wasting a couple hours just to figure out the code"
HAHA bra haha
Good one!
HA!
hehe
Ok seriously - WTF? A couple of hours? What color is the sky in your world? Even the best commented code in the world is going to take a couple of hours to understand. Exactly what kind of trivial software are you thinking of developing?
I don't like to burn bridges, but I'm pretty sure he's already burned it to the ground, even threatening to withhold my final paycheck if I don't find a replacement before I leave.
I'm not sure where y'all are from, but in California your employer has to pay you the amount of money that you think they owe you when you leave a job. If you make unreasonable claims, then they have to pay you anyhow and take you to court to get it back. It's in the labor code somewhere. I cited this myself once when leaving a job and I got all of the money that was I owed right away.
You are correct, the code should be based on the business requirements and therefore the design. And yes, the code shouldn't contradict the design. That's my point. But they need to evolve together.
If you think you can write a spec and then not diverge from it during development, then you're not being realistic.
The design always develops with the code. Software developmentment is an evolutionary process. We're not building bridges or skyscrapers.
"The difference between a software engineer and a computer scientist is that the software engineer doesn't do any engineering, while the computer scientist doesn't do any science."
I like that a lot. Do you mind if I use it?
"A major portion of their work is designing and documenting. Like how a Structural Engineer would create blueprints."
The code itself is the blueprint. The running software is the structure itself. The design document is just a description of the code (blueprint).
The most important thing is that the design documents should develop along with the code and should be updated as the code is updated. Far too often the design document is completed before coding begins. The code ends up varying significantly from the design document and the design document becomes useless and even misleading.
Open source projects are very good at this. The design grows with the code. This model is the future of software development.
Government agencies should by products with the best value to cost ratio regardless of the country of origin.
The same goes for private organizations. It's simple economics.
Adam Smith explained it clearly over 200 years ago, Why people still don't get it is beyond me.
Interesting that you should say that. "Food" is tangible. Services are not. This is why so many American's have such a hard time understanding how outsourcing can improve the American economy.
The point I always try to emphasize to people is that the you can benefit from trade in services in precisely the same way that you benefit from the trading of goods. The law of comparitive advantage still applies.
Although, what you say is true. There are some added risks to "ordering out", but that doesn't mean that you should never do it.
Let the free market alone and it will cook for itself when that is most advantageous, and it will order out when cooking at home isn't as good an option.
Just because we're not exchanging physical "goods" with them doesn't mean that free trade isn't working to our benefit.
The law of comparative advantage applies for services too. In fact, it works even better, since the cost of transportation is so much less.
Politicians will lie to you and tell you that out-sourcing is bad for America. This is because the average American finds this intuitively appealing in the same way that people found the sun goes around the earth intuitively appealing.
Why do people fail to understand the "Law of Comparitive Advantage" when the thing being traded is a service instead of a good? Offshoring is trade just like buying lamb from New Nealand and oil from Iraq. In this case we're buying a variety of services from India.
Politicians (Bush, Kerry) know this. Yet they tell the people what they want to hear, that offshoring is bad, and wilfully damage the economy in the process. It makes my blood boil.
Slashdot Mirror
I totally agree. Pixels are a top priority. After pixels its Linux compatibility and preferably OEM support thereof.
... once the RSA gets a quantum computer. http://slashdot.org/articles/01/12/20/006228.shtml WHo knows? They may already have one.
How many can you fettuccine into a slashdot post?
Why are companies allowed to sit on patents and wait for someone to come allong and violate it? Why aren't they forced to A) license it or B) to implement it? (If they choose neither then the patent should expire.)
Too bad they're out of stock. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82 E16817124010
whazzat?
"so that any developer can jump into any part of a project and be able to figure out what's going on, without wasting a couple hours just to figure out the code"
HAHA bra haha
Good one!
HA!
hehe
Ok seriously - WTF? A couple of hours? What color is the sky in your world? Even the best commented code in the world is going to take a couple of hours to understand. Exactly what kind of trivial software are you thinking of developing?
Universal's movie's are already available online.
try www.movielink.com or www.cinemanow.com
The same way that a book company or newspaper does. Except they're printing on silicon instead of paper.
I don't like to burn bridges, but I'm pretty sure he's already burned it to the ground, even threatening to withhold my final paycheck if I don't find a replacement before I leave.
I'm not sure where y'all are from, but in California your employer has to pay you the amount of money that you think they owe you when you leave a job. If you make unreasonable claims, then they have to pay you anyhow and take you to court to get it back. It's in the labor code somewhere. I cited this myself once when leaving a job and I got all of the money that was I owed right away.
no pun intended
It will increase the overall quality of software. Those of you that suck will have to find something else to do.
You are correct, the code should be based on the business requirements and therefore the design. And yes, the code shouldn't contradict the design. That's my point. But they need to evolve together.
If you think you can write a spec and then not diverge from it during development, then you're not being realistic.
The design always develops with the code. Software developmentment is an evolutionary process. We're not building bridges or skyscrapers.
"The difference between a software engineer and a computer scientist is that the software engineer doesn't do any engineering, while the computer scientist doesn't do any science." I like that a lot. Do you mind if I use it?
"A major portion of their work is designing and documenting. Like how a Structural Engineer would create blueprints."
The code itself is the blueprint. The running software is the structure itself. The design document is just a description of the code (blueprint).
The most important thing is that the design documents should develop along with the code and should be updated as the code is updated. Far too often the design document is completed before coding begins. The code ends up varying significantly from the design document and the design document becomes useless and even misleading.
Open source projects are very good at this. The design grows with the code. This model is the future of software development.
Government agencies should by products with the best value to cost ratio regardless of the country of origin. The same goes for private organizations. It's simple economics. Adam Smith explained it clearly over 200 years ago, Why people still don't get it is beyond me.
the market will take care of this
the day my ISP blocks a voice over IP port is the day that I switch to another ISP
There's nothing smart about a thing that's sole purpose is to take life.
I'm so going to buy SCO now.
@ $700 a server their going to make a bazillion gudzillion dollars!
Ha! Not only is Tim's site winning, but it's getting approximately twice the load (2 articles vs 1).
Interesting that you should say that. "Food" is tangible. Services are not. This is why so many American's have such a hard time understanding how outsourcing can improve the American economy.
The point I always try to emphasize to people is that the you can benefit from trade in services in precisely the same way that you benefit from the trading of goods. The law of comparitive advantage still applies.
Although, what you say is true. There are some added risks to "ordering out", but that doesn't mean that you should never do it.
Let the free market alone and it will cook for itself when that is most advantageous, and it will order out when cooking at home isn't as good an option.
Lasse Faire!
http://www.mini-itx.com/
Just because we're not exchanging physical "goods" with them doesn't mean that free trade isn't working to our benefit. The law of comparative advantage applies for services too. In fact, it works even better, since the cost of transportation is so much less. Politicians will lie to you and tell you that out-sourcing is bad for America. This is because the average American finds this intuitively appealing in the same way that people found the sun goes around the earth intuitively appealing.
Why do people fail to understand the "Law of Comparitive Advantage" when the thing being traded is a service instead of a good? Offshoring is trade just like buying lamb from New Nealand and oil from Iraq. In this case we're buying a variety of services from India. Politicians (Bush, Kerry) know this. Yet they tell the people what they want to hear, that offshoring is bad, and wilfully damage the economy in the process. It makes my blood boil.
what's with the giant grey circles that appear in the article when viewed with firefox but not IE