This goes to show that more than half of the USian population believes in the tyranny produced by the power elite and believe in punishing people for non-crimes. That the population of the US is so badly educated and brainwashed that they believe these things. It goes to show that the US is not a civilized nation with rational, reasonable laws that make sense in any sense of the word.
Waves hand.
I believe downloading infringing material should be punishable.
I also believe that the current penalties are absurd and way out of proportion with the offense.
And, just for the hell of it, I also think current RIAA anti-piracy efforts are counter productive and they should instead focus on delivering their content in ways that make infringement less appealing, rather than ramping up DRM and suing people.
But hey that's just me supporting the tyranny of the power elite.
There are many industries that will not accept your excuse for letting bugs in. If you are serious about writing good code, you would have unit tests, integration tests, regression, ops testing, qa environments, dedicated qa testers, and staging environments. Testing should not be an afterthought, it should be the majority of what a software developer does all day.
And there are also industries where a production bug doesn't mean someone dies or a plane crashes or a brokerage loses $200 million. If bugs have a significant potential for disaster, then sure, you set up all those environments. But that's not always the case, and sometimes your user base would rather have their reports a few hours late twice a year instead of paying for the hardware and support staff to keep all those environments functioning correctly.
I'm with you actually. I prefer deletion to commenting lines out myself. My complaint was with the anonymous poster who responded as if unit tests are some magic bullet that prevent every bug imaginable from seeing the light of day.
Seriously? Do you mean you don't have unit tests and quickie smoke screen tests for developers to run before they check in to prove their new code works and hasn't broken anything?
Tell me where you work, I don't ever want to buy one of your products.
There's unit tests, and then of course the ultimate test: the production environment. If you set up perfect unit tests every single time, then you won't notice the difference between the two. If you're human like the rest of us, then every so often an assumption you hadn't even realized you'd been making will slip through your unit tests and you've got a production bug. But hey congrats if you've never promoted a bug to production before.
I have worked with a few great coders that had style that drove me up the wall. Although I might dislike their style of doing things, I would be the first to say they are top notch coders because their code was elegant, simple, robust, extensible, scalable, etc.
Huh? Quite literally: what's not to like? I can't think of one more reasonable thing to ask for except maybe performance. I assume "simple" includes "simple to interface with", i.e. clean, documented interfaces.
It can often be as simple as brace placement, indentation style, variable naming conventions. Also, languages often have more than one completely valid way of doing something, but the one you prefer may not be the one someone else prefers.
Obviously these things are trivial compared to gaping logical errors, copy & paste code, and a lack of modularity. But it can still be jarring to deal with code that's done in a different style than you like.
Lets say you own a small chain of hardware stores, and you need a place for your offices, so you rent this place out. Then Home Depot buys time on that build-board... hows that going for you?
Not quite sure I get your point here.
This is different from you renting space somewhere else and Home Depot buying a billboard in Times Square how?
When I'm at work, I look out the window at that building. I'm familiar with it's dimensions and location.
You'd rent it as an office space, not a residential space. No one cares that it doesn't have parking. The decision makers will take the corner slots with a view and not give a damn that everyone else doesn't have a view (or, given that those lights are irritatingly distracting, maybe the reverse)
You might not get as much as a larger building, but I have no doubt you could make enough to be worth doing.
I understood that to mean he's pissing away his corporation's money. As in, letting a building in one of the highest rent markets in the country lay unused. There's no way that building makes more money empty than it does with tenants.
Ever consider he may not have tenants because no one would want to have 1,000,000 watts of light pouring into their office each and every day?
If he wants to rent the space, he'll find takers without much trouble. Also, as someone whose workspace is in Times Square facing said billboards, it's much better to be in the building with the ads on it than the building that faces the ads.
The pain in the ass about interviews is that nearly everybody is looking to please, and trying their damnedest to give the answer that they think you want to hear.
So you need sort of roundabout ways to get to the questions you *really* want answered. But before you even get that far, you need to figure out what qualities you'd like to see in a boss.
For me at least, the ideal boss is: 1. competent 2. professional 3. willing to shield me from the political BS that is part of his job 4. knows when to leave me alone (most of the time) and when to get on my case (once in a while) 5. understands what I do and the value of it, even if he can't necessarily do it himself 6. knows what I'm better suited to accomplish than he is, and is willing to leave those tasks/decisions to me
There's more, but that covers a good chunk of the basics. That list might suit you, but then again you might have something totally different in mind. The important thing is to have some clue of what you're looking for first. As far getting to know whether or not a potential supervisor has these traits, the best generic way I know of is to ask about prior experience and how he's handled specific scenarios.
That's a bit of a fine line, because what will often promote the progress of science and useful arts is compensating the people who produce useful work so they can produce more of it by devoting themselves full time to it. And if they are compensated more for producing more and better work, they are more likely to produce more and better work.
While I certainly accept that concept, what I think is being said is that copyright law is first and foremost intended to foster innovation. If that means compensating authors and/or copyright holders, so be it, but remember that the compensation is the means to an end and not the desired end itself.
I just don't buy this. Have you read what people in the 1880s wrote? Their prose puts us to shame and I somehow doubt it was one genius in a news room writing all of that.
You might not be so impressed if you could read *everything* written in the 1880s, instead of just the best stuff that people felt was worth preserving.
My reasons for reading Slashdot are, to some extent, similar to my reasons for watching the daily show. It offers nice glimpses to the society on that side of the ocean.
In that case, we're batshit crazy, but not in the ways you think we are.
And.. *gasp*... look at which country makes up 7 of the top 10 densest populations in the world...
That list needs a much higher minimum population threshold.
14 of the 50 have fewer than 100k people. Only 12 of them even crack 1M. One on the list (Union City, NJ) would get counted as part of NYC if you start looking at metro areas.
But all that aside, I wasn't trying to argue that NYC is the most densely populated part of the world, but rather took issue with the anonymous poster's assertion that New Delhi and Beijing were moreso. The instruction to look at a map followed by a pair of examples that didn't support the argument he was making got to me.
Most densely populated area of the world? Typical Yank! Look at a map and see how the [population density is around places like Beijing and New Delhi. Just because they are not milky white like you does not make them irrelevant you ignorant imbecile!
Do most of the Xbox poll questions come anywhere near other polling on each topic? If not, is their an observable leaning? Is that lean towards liberal views, conservative views, just plain 'Yes', or something else? Are they just way off in all sorts of random directions?
And once you've got all that covered, how does that 72% compare to polling on the same topic done by other polling methods?
Surely this is merely a matter of tax laws that lawyers and judges are perfectly well equiped to solve? If Amazon is a Luxembourg company, than this should be no different from any other Luxembourg company buying and selling products outside Luxembourg borders. Europe has tax laws in place regarding intra-community trade; neither Amazon nor the publisher's opinions matter.
The summary, once again, is not very clear. In fact the Guardian article isn't 100% clear either, but what appears to be the case is that for a product with an intended retail price of £10 in the UK where VAT is 20%, the base UK price would be £10 / (120%) = £8.33. Amazon allegedly insists on negotiating with UK publishers starting with a base price of £8.33. However, in Europe, Amazon is a Luxembourg company and the VAT rate there is 3% for these products. The base price for a retail price of £10 would be £10 / (103%) = £9.71.
I don't think it is really the case that Amazon is "charging them VAT" so tax law doesn't really matter - it would be more accurate to say that they are allegedly insisting on at least an extra 17% discount, and hoping that the publishers don't notice that this is not in fact part of the VAT adjustment. Or alternatively, Amazon is accused of keeping all the tax savings it makes by setting up in the EU's lowest VAT area, Luxembourg, and not sharing them with the publishers.
That makes a great deal more sense. I was thinking that I'm pretty sure there are laws in just about every country in the world that money collected as a tax must be delivered to the government, which means that Amazon would not benefit from this approach.
It's been said that the mix of stories on Slashdot is like an omelet: linux and tech, mixed with science and Legos, and a few reviews and sci-fi folded in. It's not just the stories that are a good mix, however, it's the people behind them.
and now quoting from Pulp Fiction:
"Let's not start sucking each other's dicks quite yet."
Slashdot Mirror
This goes to show that more than half of the USian population believes in the tyranny produced by the power elite and believe in punishing people for non-crimes. That the population of the US is so badly educated and brainwashed that they believe these things. It goes to show that the US is not a civilized nation with rational, reasonable laws that make sense in any sense of the word.
Waves hand.
I believe downloading infringing material should be punishable.
I also believe that the current penalties are absurd and way out of proportion with the offense.
And, just for the hell of it, I also think current RIAA anti-piracy efforts are counter productive and they should instead focus on delivering their content in ways that make infringement less appealing, rather than ramping up DRM and suing people.
But hey that's just me supporting the tyranny of the power elite.
And as far as I'm aware, in space there are significantly fewer house-sized monsters with a taste for cable sheathing.
You had some good points up until you casually dismissed the stellar kraken.
There are many industries that will not accept your excuse for letting bugs in. If you are serious about writing good code, you would have unit tests, integration tests, regression, ops testing, qa environments, dedicated qa testers, and staging environments. Testing should not be an afterthought, it should be the majority of what a software developer does all day.
And there are also industries where a production bug doesn't mean someone dies or a plane crashes or a brokerage loses $200 million. If bugs have a significant potential for disaster, then sure, you set up all those environments. But that's not always the case, and sometimes your user base would rather have their reports a few hours late twice a year instead of paying for the hardware and support staff to keep all those environments functioning correctly.
I'm with you actually. I prefer deletion to commenting lines out myself. My complaint was with the anonymous poster who responded as if unit tests are some magic bullet that prevent every bug imaginable from seeing the light of day.
> remove after it has shown to work
Seriously? Do you mean you don't have unit tests and quickie smoke screen tests for developers to run before they check in to prove their new code works and hasn't broken anything?
Tell me where you work, I don't ever want to buy one of your products.
There's unit tests, and then of course the ultimate test: the production environment. If you set up perfect unit tests every single time, then you won't notice the difference between the two. If you're human like the rest of us, then every so often an assumption you hadn't even realized you'd been making will slip through your unit tests and you've got a production bug. But hey congrats if you've never promoted a bug to production before.
I have worked with a few great coders that had style that drove me up the wall. Although I might dislike their style of doing things, I would be the first to say they are top notch coders because their code was elegant, simple, robust, extensible, scalable, etc.
Huh? Quite literally: what's not to like?
I can't think of one more reasonable thing to ask for except maybe performance. I assume "simple" includes "simple to interface with", i.e. clean, documented interfaces.
It can often be as simple as brace placement, indentation style, variable naming conventions. Also, languages often have more than one completely valid way of doing something, but the one you prefer may not be the one someone else prefers.
Obviously these things are trivial compared to gaping logical errors, copy & paste code, and a lack of modularity. But it can still be jarring to deal with code that's done in a different style than you like.
Lets say you own a small chain of hardware stores, and you need a place for your offices, so you rent this place out. Then Home Depot buys time on that build-board... hows that going for you?
Not quite sure I get your point here.
This is different from you renting space somewhere else and Home Depot buying a billboard in Times Square how?
When I'm at work, I look out the window at that building. I'm familiar with it's dimensions and location.
You'd rent it as an office space, not a residential space. No one cares that it doesn't have parking. The decision makers will take the corner slots with a view and not give a damn that everyone else doesn't have a view (or, given that those lights are irritatingly distracting, maybe the reverse)
You might not get as much as a larger building, but I have no doubt you could make enough to be worth doing.
I understood that to mean he's pissing away his corporation's money. As in, letting a building in one of the highest rent markets in the country lay unused. There's no way that building makes more money empty than it does with tenants.
Ever consider he may not have tenants because no one would want to have 1,000,000 watts of light pouring into their office each and every day?
If he wants to rent the space, he'll find takers without much trouble. Also, as someone whose workspace is in Times Square facing said billboards, it's much better to be in the building with the ads on it than the building that faces the ads.
The pain in the ass about interviews is that nearly everybody is looking to please, and trying their damnedest to give the answer that they think you want to hear.
So you need sort of roundabout ways to get to the questions you *really* want answered. But before you even get that far, you need to figure out what qualities you'd like to see in a boss.
For me at least, the ideal boss is:
1. competent
2. professional
3. willing to shield me from the political BS that is part of his job
4. knows when to leave me alone (most of the time) and when to get on my case (once in a while)
5. understands what I do and the value of it, even if he can't necessarily do it himself
6. knows what I'm better suited to accomplish than he is, and is willing to leave those tasks/decisions to me
There's more, but that covers a good chunk of the basics. That list might suit you, but then again you might have something totally different in mind. The important thing is to have some clue of what you're looking for first. As far getting to know whether or not a potential supervisor has these traits, the best generic way I know of is to ask about prior experience and how he's handled specific scenarios.
Indeed. If not for the French, we in the States would be speaking English today.
It saddens me that I do not have mod points to give you at the moment.
Their logo is awesome.
Nope. For awesome, it should wear boots and you gotta believe me, I tell you no lies.
Son, son, you've gone too far.
That's a bit of a fine line, because what will often promote the progress of science and useful arts is compensating the people who produce useful work so they can produce more of it by devoting themselves full time to it. And if they are compensated more for producing more and better work, they are more likely to produce more and better work.
While I certainly accept that concept, what I think is being said is that copyright law is first and foremost intended to foster innovation. If that means compensating authors and/or copyright holders, so be it, but remember that the compensation is the means to an end and not the desired end itself.
I just don't buy this. Have you read what people in the 1880s wrote? Their prose puts us to shame and I somehow doubt it was one genius in a news room writing all of that.
You might not be so impressed if you could read *everything* written in the 1880s, instead of just the best stuff that people felt was worth preserving.
My reasons for reading Slashdot are, to some extent, similar to my reasons for watching the daily show. It offers nice glimpses to the society on that side of the ocean.
In that case, we're batshit crazy, but not in the ways you think we are.
Five.
Even frozen, no more than a year. Eat them before then, certainly before 5 years go by. Otherwise you might get sick.
New York City isn't even in the top 50 by population density: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_proper_by_population_density
And.. *gasp*... look at which country makes up 7 of the top 10 densest populations in the world...
That list needs a much higher minimum population threshold.
14 of the 50 have fewer than 100k people. Only 12 of them even crack 1M. One on the list (Union City, NJ) would get counted as part of NYC if you start looking at metro areas.
But all that aside, I wasn't trying to argue that NYC is the most densely populated part of the world, but rather took issue with the anonymous poster's assertion that New Delhi and Beijing were moreso. The instruction to look at a map followed by a pair of examples that didn't support the argument he was making got to me.
Most densely populated area of the world? Typical Yank! Look at a map and see how the [population density is around places like Beijing and New Delhi. Just because they are not milky white like you does not make them irrelevant you ignorant imbecile!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing (pop density 1200/sq km or 3000/sq m)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_delhi (pop density 5854/sq km or 15,164/sq m)
vs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_york_city (pop density 10,518/sq km or 27,243/sq m)
So Beijing and New Delhi don't come close to NYC for density.
Same suck, different ass.
If I ever decide to change my sig, that will be it.
Do most of the Xbox poll questions come anywhere near other polling on each topic? If not, is their an observable leaning? Is that lean towards liberal views, conservative views, just plain 'Yes', or something else? Are they just way off in all sorts of random directions?
And once you've got all that covered, how does that 72% compare to polling on the same topic done by other polling methods?
Surely this is merely a matter of tax laws that lawyers and judges are perfectly well equiped to solve?
If Amazon is a Luxembourg company, than this should be no different from any other Luxembourg company buying and selling products outside Luxembourg borders. Europe has tax laws in place regarding intra-community trade; neither Amazon nor the publisher's opinions matter.
The summary, once again, is not very clear. In fact the Guardian article isn't 100% clear either, but what appears to be the case is that for a product with an intended retail price of £10 in the UK where VAT is 20%, the base UK price would be £10 / (120%) = £8.33. Amazon allegedly insists on negotiating with UK publishers starting with a base price of £8.33. However, in Europe, Amazon is a Luxembourg company and the VAT rate there is 3% for these products. The base price for a retail price of £10 would be £10 / (103%) = £9.71.
I don't think it is really the case that Amazon is "charging them VAT" so tax law doesn't really matter - it would be more accurate to say that they are allegedly insisting on at least an extra 17% discount, and hoping that the publishers don't notice that this is not in fact part of the VAT adjustment. Or alternatively, Amazon is accused of keeping all the tax savings it makes by setting up in the EU's lowest VAT area, Luxembourg, and not sharing them with the publishers.
That makes a great deal more sense. I was thinking that I'm pretty sure there are laws in just about every country in the world that money collected as a tax must be delivered to the government, which means that Amazon would not benefit from this approach.
It's been said that the mix of stories on Slashdot is like an omelet: linux and tech, mixed with science and Legos, and a few reviews and sci-fi folded in. It's not just the stories that are a good mix, however, it's the people behind them.
and now quoting from Pulp Fiction:
"Let's not start sucking each other's dicks quite yet."
Nope, no politicians. And no concept of sarcasm until they learned it from the conquered Gauls.
They had a much better system of banking in Roman times - They didn't have banks!
They didn't have politicians either.