The horrible idea is not one site's implementation of a mass moderation system, it's a mass moderation system period. The problem is one of human nature: There are two kinds of people in the world, those who think others are wrong in their opinions, and those who think others are wrong in their opinions and should be silenced and punished for them. Because the latter are approx. 50% of the population, i.e. a huge number of people, you simply cannot have moderation by the masses, even on an infrequent, impromptu basis.
Yes, you gotta learn the officially approved responses, including which delusionary ideas are allowed (many are, but a few are prohibited). Then you can rack up the karma.
Bonus points for slipping in, esp. in IE topics, that you're typing it on Firefox.
Ideological wackjobs I can handle, but this one has the gall to complain about companies trying to confuse the term "open source" to suit their own desires when he does the very same thing with the term "free".
How realistic is it to expect a Windows user to run their OS as non-root?"
Unfortunately, completely un-. I've tried at home -- too much of a PITA. I have to at work (corp. policy), and when it is a PITA, it's a huge PITA.
Hopefully this will all change in Vista, but until then, do the opposite, continue to log in as admin, but run network-facing programs, esp. IE, under a limited user account. On XP there's DropMyRights. I run 2K at home, which doesn't support what that utility needs, so I achieved similar manually, described in my journal, here and its addendum.
True, I would just say one might want to max out their pre-tax investment opportunities first. The IRS limit for contributing untaxed (deferred until retirement) income to a 401K this year is $15K, and I would reach that before even considering a Roth. Because even if they have to change the rules on us later, they can't really go back in time and know what our contributions were each year to tax them retroactively. But Congress can very easily change their minds about Roths. Take full advantage of what has a tax benefit now, and then take part in what is only a promise of tax benefit in the distant future.
At my first job, which was with, at the time, the 2nd largest software company in the world, managers were not allowed to put anything, absolutely NOTHING, positive in the annual performance reviews. So for every employee there was a written record of nothing but negative comments. I figured at the time it was sparked by wrongful termination suits filed by ex-employees, and the company was just trying to prep for them. Still, it didn't exactly do wonders for morale.
The context of the GP's statement is what could Sun do to make money. Therefore, the meaning of that clause grokked by those without mental impairment from fanboyism is "There is no money in Java [for Sun]...".
The cancer is you and your colleagues. Instead of learning how to secure your systems, you'd rather be juvenile and declare them "incurable", meanwhile they load up with malware and spread it to others.
Which language boasts faster raw allocation performance, the Java language, or C/C++?
You might want to think about this: Modern JVM's are written in C/C++. That is, any memory allocater developed for the Java language could be used in C/C++. Fortunately, C/C++ supports objects as automatic variables, so I only use new or malloc for around 5-10% of my needs. I suspect it's similar for most C/C++ developers and their typical tasks. If for some reason I found myself having to do mostly just heap allocations, and tons and tons of them, then I'd look for a kick-ass new replacement to drop in.
The real summary is at the end of the article. Criminals will just use anonymous access points and encryption. "You haven't done anything but increase surveillance of law-abiding citizens."
Evolution contains many "laws" for instance. Like Dolo's Law (which is that the same evolutionary pathway is statistically unlikely to be transversed in reverse,...
Are you kidding?!? That's the whole argument of ID, that it all happening on its own is (highly) statistically unlikely. I realize there can be varying degrees of "unlikelihood", but I find it amazing that one unlikelihood is deemed so unlikely that it was made a scientific "law" that it really cannot be, and another unlikelihood is deemed pretty much the exact opposite.
Honestly, all you Slashdotters that are sans degree need to get over the DE (degree envy) and either go for one yourself or just accept that you don't have one (and don't need one) and be okay with that. But stop the whining about people who have them.
Recruiters just want their fee for placing a body. Most people probably lie about their years of experience, and recruiters are more than happy to go along.
As for titles, I was once talking with one while unemployed and when I told her that I was "Software Engineer" two jobs ago, and "Web Developer" at my last job, she said "wasn't that a step down?". I tried to tell her that with a 20% raise, it wasn't to me, but she still seemed hung up on the titles.
It sucks pouring so many hours into something and making all the sacrifices necessary to work 80 hour weeks just to have the project fail.
That's an easy one: Don't work 80 hours a week. I wouldn't do it unless I was getting paid for the two jobs that I was doing (and then not for forever).
But in general, aligning your job satisfaction with things that often don't work out, or otherwise things that are outside of your control, is a choice, and a bad one at that. Rather than feeling good about hitting PHBs' arbitrary "deadlines" etc., feel good about the quality of your work. I would like to see people using what I've written, sure, but bottom-line, it's a fucking job, so ultimately I don't care if anyone ever uses anything, as long as I get paid all the same. My satisfaction comes from things like reusing code as a library that I had stopped for a minute and thought about on a previous project and decided to make more general-purpose.
And as TFA stated, you do not get as much money for verifying that there's probably nothing to something than you do for looking into how bad a dire catastrophe something might be.
To rip off political commentator George Will (who said something similar but about a different subject), what should be a science issue with political ramnifications has become a political issue with science ramnifications.
I didn't say they were complex, I said they were huge. And if you just cracked a book on Java two weeks ago, the guy with 10 years of daily Java under his belt could easily find that out.
Language is an issue. I work in a small group of mostly senior C++ developers. We move pretty fast and there's no time to go back and correct the mistakes of someone with much less mastery of the language. For other languages and in other situations, this may not apply. I have never looked at RoR.
Parent is dead-on. IBM trots her out to: 1) Throw some buzzwords around that she doesn't understand the distinctions of 2) Play the "we're short of women around here" angle/ploy (an angle a local IT skills certifier has been playing on TV recently) 3) To cheerlead for more suckers to enter CS so that IBM and other companies are assured a steady stream of cheap labor (until you get too expensive, after around say 5 years of experience).
This wasn't the first and won't be the last "rah rah" article by the American tech industry that means nothing.
Slashdot Mirror
Occasionally?!? You must be new here.
The horrible idea is not one site's implementation of a mass moderation system, it's a mass moderation system period. The problem is one of human nature: There are two kinds of people in the world, those who think others are wrong in their opinions, and those who think others are wrong in their opinions and should be silenced and punished for them. Because the latter are approx. 50% of the population, i.e. a huge number of people, you simply cannot have moderation by the masses, even on an infrequent, impromptu basis.
Yes, you gotta learn the officially approved responses, including which delusionary ideas are allowed (many are, but a few are prohibited). Then you can rack up the karma.
Bonus points for slipping in, esp. in IE topics, that you're typing it on Firefox.
Ideological wackjobs I can handle, but this one has the gall to complain about companies trying to confuse the term "open source" to suit their own desires when he does the very same thing with the term "free".
How realistic is it to expect a Windows user to run their OS as non-root?"
Unfortunately, completely un-. I've tried at home -- too much of a PITA. I have to at work (corp. policy), and when it is a PITA, it's a huge PITA.
Hopefully this will all change in Vista, but until then, do the opposite, continue to log in as admin, but run network-facing programs, esp. IE, under a limited user account. On XP there's DropMyRights. I run 2K at home, which doesn't support what that utility needs, so I achieved similar manually, described in my journal, here and its addendum.
True, I would just say one might want to max out their pre-tax investment opportunities first. The IRS limit for contributing untaxed (deferred until retirement) income to a 401K this year is $15K, and I would reach that before even considering a Roth. Because even if they have to change the rules on us later, they can't really go back in time and know what our contributions were each year to tax them retroactively. But Congress can very easily change their minds about Roths. Take full advantage of what has a tax benefit now, and then take part in what is only a promise of tax benefit in the distant future.
Roth IRAs are a great way to save your post-tax income for retirement since once you retire, all the returns remain untaxed.
For now. Who knows what the economic conditions will be like, and might require, by the time we retire.
At my first job, which was with, at the time, the 2nd largest software company in the world, managers were not allowed to put anything, absolutely NOTHING, positive in the annual performance reviews. So for every employee there was a written record of nothing but negative comments. I figured at the time it was sparked by wrongful termination suits filed by ex-employees, and the company was just trying to prep for them. Still, it didn't exactly do wonders for morale.
Everything else was right, but saying this:
DOS and Windows 9x did not have multiple user support because they were simply badly designed, ignoring Unix design concepts.
Is like saying the Honda S2000 does not have seating for 8 because it was simply badly designed, ignoring Chevy Suburban design concepts!
And... [looks around]... his last name has a 'G' in it. A 'G', people.
Seriously, what was your point? Was Spin Rite a bad product?
Bet there won't be any "I am AMD of Borg, you will be approximated" jokes. Afterall, sacred cows and humor do not mix.
The context of the GP's statement is what could Sun do to make money. Therefore, the meaning of that clause grokked by those without mental impairment from fanboyism is "There is no money in Java [for Sun]...".
The cancer is you and your colleagues. Instead of learning how to secure your systems, you'd rather be juvenile and declare them "incurable", meanwhile they load up with malware and spread it to others.
Which language boasts faster raw allocation performance, the Java language, or C/C++?
You might want to think about this: Modern JVM's are written in C/C++. That is, any memory allocater developed for the Java language could be used in C/C++. Fortunately, C/C++ supports objects as automatic variables, so I only use new or malloc for around 5-10% of my needs. I suspect it's similar for most C/C++ developers and their typical tasks. If for some reason I found myself having to do mostly just heap allocations, and tons and tons of them, then I'd look for a kick-ass new replacement to drop in.
The flaw in your logic is that "blow up" dolls only help terrorists.
Terrorist logic?!?
The real summary is at the end of the article. Criminals will just use anonymous access points and encryption. "You haven't done anything but increase surveillance of law-abiding citizens."
I should've
s/of ID/of skeptics of (macro-) Evolution/
as I don't really know anything about ID, and was only representing/asking for myself.
Evolution contains many "laws" for instance. Like Dolo's Law (which is that the same evolutionary pathway is statistically unlikely to be transversed in reverse,...
Are you kidding?!? That's the whole argument of ID, that it all happening on its own is (highly) statistically unlikely. I realize there can be varying degrees of "unlikelihood", but I find it amazing that one unlikelihood is deemed so unlikely that it was made a scientific "law" that it really cannot be, and another unlikelihood is deemed pretty much the exact opposite.
Honestly, all you Slashdotters that are sans degree need to get over the DE (degree envy) and either go for one yourself or just accept that you don't have one (and don't need one) and be okay with that. But stop the whining about people who have them.
Recruiters just want their fee for placing a body. Most people probably lie about their years of experience, and recruiters are more than happy to go along.
As for titles, I was once talking with one while unemployed and when I told her that I was "Software Engineer" two jobs ago, and "Web Developer" at my last job, she said "wasn't that a step down?". I tried to tell her that with a 20% raise, it wasn't to me, but she still seemed hung up on the titles.
It sucks pouring so many hours into something and making all the sacrifices necessary to work 80 hour weeks just to have the project fail.
That's an easy one: Don't work 80 hours a week. I wouldn't do it unless I was getting paid for the two jobs that I was doing (and then not for forever).
But in general, aligning your job satisfaction with things that often don't work out, or otherwise things that are outside of your control, is a choice, and a bad one at that. Rather than feeling good about hitting PHBs' arbitrary "deadlines" etc., feel good about the quality of your work. I would like to see people using what I've written, sure, but bottom-line, it's a fucking job, so ultimately I don't care if anyone ever uses anything, as long as I get paid all the same. My satisfaction comes from things like reusing code as a library that I had stopped for a minute and thought about on a previous project and decided to make more general-purpose.
And as TFA stated, you do not get as much money for verifying that there's probably nothing to something than you do for looking into how bad a dire catastrophe something might be.
To rip off political commentator George Will (who said something similar but about a different subject), what should be a science issue with political ramnifications has become a political issue with science ramnifications.
Java libraries are not that complex.
I didn't say they were complex, I said they were huge. And if you just cracked a book on Java two weeks ago, the guy with 10 years of daily Java under his belt could easily find that out.
Language is an issue. I work in a small group of mostly senior C++ developers. We move pretty fast and there's no time to go back and correct the mistakes of someone with much less mastery of the language. For other languages and in other situations, this may not apply. I have never looked at RoR.
Parent is dead-on. IBM trots her out to:
1) Throw some buzzwords around that she doesn't understand the distinctions of
2) Play the "we're short of women around here" angle/ploy (an angle a local IT skills certifier has been playing on TV recently)
3) To cheerlead for more suckers to enter CS so that IBM and other companies are assured a steady stream of cheap labor (until you get too expensive, after around say 5 years of experience).
This wasn't the first and won't be the last "rah rah" article by the American tech industry that means nothing.