Advertisers have always been lame, but what's newer is that today's web site operators don't seem to care how trashed up their sites look. Pop-overs are so common now it's becoming unbearable, but oftentimes they're not even ads. It's enter your email because every Tom, Dick, and Harry has a newsletter now. Or wouldn't you like to take a survey.
And videos that auto-play. That shrink down and position to always being visible when you scroll past the full-size player. Because they're sure you didn't really mean to avoid it. Or the I guess HTML 5 video player controls where there's no stop or pause button present, so all you can do is drag the progress bar to the end to get it shut the hell up and stop visually distracting.
The point being, it's the in-your-face kind of ads that I want to block, but it's also a site's own content, that's been implemented in a purposefully pushy way, that needs blocking.
If you have managers who were taught in MBA school that you don't need to know anything about widgets to run a widget-making business, they're gonna believe that similarly it isn't required that the programmers know the business to program for it.
This could be just pandering to the libertarian Right of the Republican Party towards a bid for its presidential nomination. Or he could really believe in citizen privacy rights. Who knows.
Maybe Mozilla could make a search engine and re-light the competition fire and user focus in this space. (Bing just seems to be a clone of the stagnating leader.)
I would never even give away a program binary, let alone source, because even patents and copyrights aside, someone could use your code in their business and if something goes wrong, they could claim it's your fault and you cost them x thousands of dollars and then try to recover it from you in a lawsuit. I don't need patent reform, I need legal immunity; something like a good samaritan law for software.
.NET is dominant on the Windows platform. After over a decade doing C/C++ on Win32, I finally had to switch to it several years back. Except for specialized stuff where the extra speed actually matters, no one is developing applications on Windows at this low level anymore.
Attitudes are different outside of Silicon Valley. The worst I've seen along these lines is a few of my peers who've done things blatantly towards adding to their resume vice being a professional at their current gig.
While "software engineering" isn't "engineering" per se (it's a lot of art(isanship)), consider that it's not all just a bunch of phony stuff that doesn't matter a hill of beans. And that those who strive to do software well in languages including C#, Java, and JavaScript would be as adverse to working on a development team with you as you would be with us.
I get that you can't unteach laziness and lack of follow-through, but you also can't teach a passion for doing software well. If you're satisfied with people whose interest is elsewhere but can easily learn a couple of languages, that's fine, but I sure wouldn't want to work with them.
tl;dr: "Someone who learns how to design can design anything" is about as true as MBA schools' "someone who learns how to manage can manage anything".
How do you know you could get any "real engineers" to work as programmers?
I consider good programmers to have deep interest in software engineering principles and techniques. My experience has been that it's a real crapshoot to find this in CS degreed people, and almost impossible in other degreed people. (YMMV.)
Furthermore, ageism is rampant in most of the technical field now, as HR types will want to hire someone their own age.
Now that I think about it, I don't think I've seen older people in HR in my career so far (and I'm later in my career) so maybe ageism is rampant in HR as well.
Ageism is probably rampant in every job function except top management, because age is thought to correlate somewhat with compensation, and upper management wants to keep a lid on expanding costs to the business everywhere but their ranks, of course.
(That is, everyone in every job function is keenly aware of the value they and their peers bring, so nothing different about the suits in this regard, where the only unique part is that they have the power to set expenditures policy.)
You might as well be deriding a programmer for being gay, or a woman.
No, because in today's world sexual preference and gender bigotry are disdained, but religious bigotry is not only acceptable, it's considered fully warranted. (Well, except against Muslims, because it could lead to harassment and discrimination. And they don't deserve that. *cough*Unlike Christians. And those among Jews who are religious and pro-Israel.)
The human race never progresses enlightenment-wise, we just periodically change what groups it's acceptable to hate.
C++ is very complex, and whole swaths of the language can be safely ignored.
And this is why I wouldn't recommmend C++. I loved the language and did it for right around ten years (1999-2009), and saw people online who knew it, but I never met anyone live in my professional career who ever bothered to really learn it. (And now later, I'm having the same experience with JavaScript.)
But I wonder about why the very particular constraint of "classic OOP compiled". I don't think I'd recommend any of those anymore; aside from specialized applications, if what one is going to be writing is large enough to utilize OOP, then VM'ed languages are much more relevant these days.
Suppression of unpopular truths will be far more effective if people aren't even made aware that there is a dispute.
That's part of the idea behind the "the debate is over" thing; to make people believe that there is no more disagreement. If Google makes it so that arguments for one side of an issue are never seen, as being non-facts, then it'll be conveniently as if another side never existed. Goodbye nuance. Life will be so much simpler. Governments will be jealous.
In the meantime, I still have private financial information I consider to be publicly available. [...] So, Slashdot, how would you handle this situation?
Slashdot Mirror
Advertisers have always been lame, but what's newer is that today's web site operators don't seem to care how trashed up their sites look. Pop-overs are so common now it's becoming unbearable, but oftentimes they're not even ads. It's enter your email because every Tom, Dick, and Harry has a newsletter now. Or wouldn't you like to take a survey.
And videos that auto-play. That shrink down and position to always being visible when you scroll past the full-size player. Because they're sure you didn't really mean to avoid it. Or the I guess HTML 5 video player controls where there's no stop or pause button present, so all you can do is drag the progress bar to the end to get it shut the hell up and stop visually distracting.
The point being, it's the in-your-face kind of ads that I want to block, but it's also a site's own content, that's been implemented in a purposefully pushy way, that needs blocking.
If you have managers who were taught in MBA school that you don't need to know anything about widgets to run a widget-making business, they're gonna believe that similarly it isn't required that the programmers know the business to program for it.
Wail til you take it in for service. If I ran a dealership, I'd keep track of who I needed to recoup some profits from. <evil grin>
Next there'll be no bank robbers, just undocumented withdrawers.
Some of my best thinking is done in the shower in the morning. Would not be pretty to watch that.
We should return to enforcing and revoking corporate charters when they fail to serve the public interest.
We should return even earlier to when there was no such meddling by the state. Businesses should sink or swim on their own.
This could be just pandering to the libertarian Right of the Republican Party towards a bid for its presidential nomination. Or he could really believe in citizen privacy rights. Who knows.
Google: The IE 6 of Internet search.
Maybe Mozilla could make a search engine and re-light the competition fire and user focus in this space. (Bing just seems to be a clone of the stagnating leader.)
It shouldn't be about what you want, or what you think you want, but what you need. I want (need?) a search engine that will give me that.
I would never even give away a program binary, let alone source, because even patents and copyrights aside, someone could use your code in their business and if something goes wrong, they could claim it's your fault and you cost them x thousands of dollars and then try to recover it from you in a lawsuit. I don't need patent reform, I need legal immunity; something like a good samaritan law for software.
.NET is dominant on the Windows platform. After over a decade doing C/C++ on Win32, I finally had to switch to it several years back. Except for specialized stuff where the extra speed actually matters, no one is developing applications on Windows at this low level anymore.
Attitudes are different outside of Silicon Valley. The worst I've seen along these lines is a few of my peers who've done things blatantly towards adding to their resume vice being a professional at their current gig.
While "software engineering" isn't "engineering" per se (it's a lot of art(isanship)), consider that it's not all just a bunch of phony stuff that doesn't matter a hill of beans. And that those who strive to do software well in languages including C#, Java, and JavaScript would be as adverse to working on a development team with you as you would be with us.
I get that you can't unteach laziness and lack of follow-through, but you also can't teach a passion for doing software well. If you're satisfied with people whose interest is elsewhere but can easily learn a couple of languages, that's fine, but I sure wouldn't want to work with them.
tl;dr: "Someone who learns how to design can design anything" is about as true as MBA schools' "someone who learns how to manage can manage anything".
How do you know you could get any "real engineers" to work as programmers?
I consider good programmers to have deep interest in software engineering principles and techniques. My experience has been that it's a real crapshoot to find this in CS degreed people, and almost impossible in other degreed people. (YMMV.)
Furthermore, ageism is rampant in most of the technical field now, as HR types will want to hire someone their own age.
Now that I think about it, I don't think I've seen older people in HR in my career so far (and I'm later in my career) so maybe ageism is rampant in HR as well.
Ageism is probably rampant in every job function except top management, because age is thought to correlate somewhat with compensation, and upper management wants to keep a lid on expanding costs to the business everywhere but their ranks, of course.
(That is, everyone in every job function is keenly aware of the value they and their peers bring, so nothing different about the suits in this regard, where the only unique part is that they have the power to set expenditures policy.)
Why it really is that Slashdotters have an aversion to contact sports: painful memories from high school
You might as well be deriding a programmer for being gay, or a woman.
No, because in today's world sexual preference and gender bigotry are disdained, but religious bigotry is not only acceptable, it's considered fully warranted. (Well, except against Muslims, because it could lead to harassment and discrimination. And they don't deserve that. *cough*Unlike Christians. And those among Jews who are religious and pro-Israel.)
The human race never progresses enlightenment-wise, we just periodically change what groups it's acceptable to hate.
C++ is very complex, and whole swaths of the language can be safely ignored.
And this is why I wouldn't recommmend C++. I loved the language and did it for right around ten years (1999-2009), and saw people online who knew it, but I never met anyone live in my professional career who ever bothered to really learn it. (And now later, I'm having the same experience with JavaScript.)
But I wonder about why the very particular constraint of "classic OOP compiled". I don't think I'd recommend any of those anymore; aside from specialized applications, if what one is going to be writing is large enough to utilize OOP, then VM'ed languages are much more relevant these days.
Suppression of unpopular truths will be far more effective if people aren't even made aware that there is a dispute.
That's part of the idea behind the "the debate is over" thing; to make people believe that there is no more disagreement. If Google makes it so that arguments for one side of an issue are never seen, as being non-facts, then it'll be conveniently as if another side never existed. Goodbye nuance. Life will be so much simpler. Governments will be jealous.
In the meantime, I still have private financial information I consider to be publicly available. [...] So, Slashdot, how would you handle this situation?
I'd certainly start by deleting my info there!
At the time the passage was authored it was likely referring to Nero's profile appearing on of Roman coinage.
Because the people were required to carry their coins only in their right hands or stuck to their foreheads?
Sounds more like the Internet of Thingies.
Even if it's delivered to your location via... stool pigeon?
I still don't hate those as much as the term "Web 2.0". (Or especially its adjective form, "Web 2.0ey".)