but you should understand anything you put in your own codebase.
Yes, yes, of course. But there is no good reason that a solution from Stackoverflow should be less understood, and plenty of reasons it will be more understood.
Very often "collective experience" is wrong
But is it more or less likely to be wrong than a roll-your-own solution? Solutions on Stackoverflow are rated and moderated, and written by people with visible reputation points.
If you were a tech manager, and you had two candidates: One that claimed to use Stackoverflow regularly, and one that claimed to avoid the site, which would you hire?
If you paste code you don't understand, then you're in trouble.
Of course. But most Stackoverflow answers include comments (written by the submitter, or appended by others) that explain why the code works, what the limitations are, and any gotchas that need to be considered. If I write the code myself from scratch, by reading API docs or whatever, I don't benefit from that collective experience, and I am likely to understand the problems with the code even less. There is nothing noble about "struggling" with code, and that does not necessarily lead to better understanding.
I believe this is a case of correlation rather than causation. Taking paternity leave is likely to be correlated with being a good dad, but it seems unlikely that it is the paternity leave itself that causes that. Newborns crave human contact. But until the are about 6 months old, they don't really care who that human is. Besides, for the first 2 months, they spend 20+ hours a day sleeping.
When my kids were born I arranged to work from home 2 days per week, and wrote code while the kid was sleeping. We saved money on daycare, and I treasure the memories of spending time with the babies, but I doubt if my kids are really doing any better because if it.
They don't need to prove anything, just label their produce properly.
It is labeled properly. There is no evidence whatsoever that it is unsafe, and there is no reason for the government to require it to be labeled. Hundreds of products specifically say they do not contain GMO, so any consumer that wants to avoid GMO products can do so. But they have no right to push their anti-science hysteria onto others.
Nobody high up in a big company cares about legacy code and technical debt.
Then focus on what they do care about: money. If you can show the decision makers that the company is losing customers and revenue, and you can quantify that, then fixing the UX will become a priority. If you are not losing revenue over this issue, then the development team should be working on something else.
People are afraid of these traps exactly because they work so well.
The main problem with these systems is that they issue too many tickets to middle class white people. If they worked like human cops, and just focused on teenagers and black people, they would be more acceptable.
What the car dumps out of full autonomous mode right before an accident...?
Since self driving cars (SDCs) do not "dump out of full autonomous mode", that will not happen. The car may beep to get the human's attention, but the computer will continue to make a best effort to prevent an accident, or reduce its severity, until the human affirmatively takes control of the vehicle. There is no way in hell that the computer will just stop controlling a moving car.
It is odd that when people try to point out the problems with SDCs, they often tend to focus on tasks where SDCs particularly excel. Many accidents happen in a split second, and an SDC will react far faster, steer optimally, pre-tension seat belts, and almost always handle the situation better than a human. The increased reaction time alone will save thousands of lives annually.
If their dispatchers are what's holding them back from competing and providing a service that customers want (while reducing labor costs too!), then why wouldn't they fire all of their dispatchers?
Because the dispatchers ARE the "taxi company". If you get rid of the dispatchers, there is nothing left except the medallions, which are just an expensive sunk cost. Taxis are quickly becoming obsolete, and in a decade they will be as common as pay phones.
All this can do is tell you if people expect to need it in the future
It doesn't even tell you that. I use Python, but I have never looked at a Python tutorial. The language is simple and the syntax is obvious. But when I was learning Objective-C, I had to go thru 3 tutorials just to understand memory management.
Microsoft now owns Minecraft and they can do whatever they want with it. They may be using Python now, but that can change in a heartbeat.
Then the school is free to dump Minecraft and move to something else. They didn't use Python because of Minecraft. They had already decided to teach Python, and then picked Minecraft because it used Python. The students also write Python plug-ins for FreeCAD and print their projects on a 3D printer. There are plenty of other options.
Btw, you can write Minecraft plug-ins in languages other than Python, including C++ and Java. You may be able to use C# or VB as well.
Its Microsoft, thats more than enough for some people to FUD the place up...
My kid's elementary school has an after school class where the kids write Minecraft plugins in Python. The kids enjoy it, and even the girls like it since Minecraft involves mostly building rather than just boy-oriented destruction. I don't see how this creates any lock-in for Microsoft, since the skills are portable, and Microsoft doesn't control Python. Microsoft may get some small advantage from this, but the kids benefit more.
Get us commoners to eat insects while the ruling class gets steak.
My chickens eat insects, while I eat eggs. I turn over a few square meters of topsoil and compost each day, so they can eat the bugs and worms. They also eat table scraps, and a few scoops of commercial laying pellets.
Then how do 95 percent of MacBook users set up Wi-Fi on their home routers?
I use a 7 year old USB-to-CAT5 dongle. Since then, my wife, daughter, son, and I, have collectively owned more than a dozen laptops. There is no need to have a dongle for every laptop.
Ok, Einstein. Provide model numbers of the sensors capable of doing what you claim "are clearly easily gathered".
The landing gear use hydraulic and pneumatic systems, and there are already sensors that measure that pressure. The weight of the plane is a simple linear function of the pressure of the fluids in the landing gear.
Either this information is false, or the Belgian minister is an idiot. If we can track them on a single platform, it would be dumb to let them know, because they will move somewhere else. It would also be dumb to tell them that it is hard for authorities to monitor if that was actually true. So I assume this is all false information disseminated as a deception.
Except when they've rootkitted a laptop near you, or used an antenna
Defending against these attacks is not the responsibility of the participants in this exercise, and is not the point of these games. The defense against these attacks includes physical security, and better background checks. Those are not skills that are important in a penetration specialist, nor could they be realistically tested in this game scenario. To find a rootkitted laptop, you would walk around disabling wifi on each laptop until you found the offender. Do you think this exercise could work if any team could walk up and physically disable another teams equipment?
If breaking the rules is allowed, then you are better off simply smashing your competitors' equipment. Soon your "cyber warriors" would all be large muscle men with IQs of 80, because that was the winning strategy in the game. Do you think they would win in a real war?
Really? A small drone flying around, saturating/jamming your WiFi freq.
Except they didn't use a drone. They used a stationary jammer inside the facility, which is not realistic. They were also jamming WiFi, but a real military comm center would have cabled connections. WiFi was only being used because it was easier to run the game that way.
You want realistic games? Nothing is off limits.
The everyone would bring a shotgun to a chess tournament. Games are designed to test and exercise specific capabilities. There are always compromises that make them different from a real war, and rules to prevent participants from exploiting those compromises to "win" in unrealistic ways that would not work in a real conflict. Cheating to win doesn't make you better. It just corrupts the process, and then game is no longer an effective tool for improvement. So in a real war, you lose.
Slashdot Mirror
but you should understand anything you put in your own codebase.
Yes, yes, of course. But there is no good reason that a solution from Stackoverflow should be less understood, and plenty of reasons it will be more understood.
Very often "collective experience" is wrong
But is it more or less likely to be wrong than a roll-your-own solution? Solutions on Stackoverflow are rated and moderated, and written by people with visible reputation points.
If you were a tech manager, and you had two candidates: One that claimed to use Stackoverflow regularly, and one that claimed to avoid the site, which would you hire?
If you paste code you don't understand, then you're in trouble.
Of course. But most Stackoverflow answers include comments (written by the submitter, or appended by others) that explain why the code works, what the limitations are, and any gotchas that need to be considered. If I write the code myself from scratch, by reading API docs or whatever, I don't benefit from that collective experience, and I am likely to understand the problems with the code even less. There is nothing noble about "struggling" with code, and that does not necessarily lead to better understanding.
I believe this is a case of correlation rather than causation. Taking paternity leave is likely to be correlated with being a good dad, but it seems unlikely that it is the paternity leave itself that causes that. Newborns crave human contact. But until the are about 6 months old, they don't really care who that human is. Besides, for the first 2 months, they spend 20+ hours a day sleeping.
When my kids were born I arranged to work from home 2 days per week, and wrote code while the kid was sleeping. We saved money on daycare, and I treasure the memories of spending time with the babies, but I doubt if my kids are really doing any better because if it.
They don't need to prove anything, just label their produce properly.
It is labeled properly. There is no evidence whatsoever that it is unsafe, and there is no reason for the government to require it to be labeled. Hundreds of products specifically say they do not contain GMO, so any consumer that wants to avoid GMO products can do so. But they have no right to push their anti-science hysteria onto others.
Nobody high up in a big company cares about legacy code and technical debt.
Then focus on what they do care about: money. If you can show the decision makers that the company is losing customers and revenue, and you can quantify that, then fixing the UX will become a priority. If you are not losing revenue over this issue, then the development team should be working on something else.
would have modded you up if you had written something like devi^%E$^ instead of just devi
Modern digital protocols don't generate static or line noise. This isn't 1992.
People are afraid of these traps exactly because they work so well.
The main problem with these systems is that they issue too many tickets to middle class white people. If they worked like human cops, and just focused on teenagers and black people, they would be more acceptable.
What the car dumps out of full autonomous mode right before an accident ...?
Since self driving cars (SDCs) do not "dump out of full autonomous mode", that will not happen. The car may beep to get the human's attention, but the computer will continue to make a best effort to prevent an accident, or reduce its severity, until the human affirmatively takes control of the vehicle. There is no way in hell that the computer will just stop controlling a moving car.
It is odd that when people try to point out the problems with SDCs, they often tend to focus on tasks where SDCs particularly excel. Many accidents happen in a split second, and an SDC will react far faster, steer optimally, pre-tension seat belts, and almost always handle the situation better than a human. The increased reaction time alone will save thousands of lives annually.
If their dispatchers are what's holding them back from competing and providing a service that customers want (while reducing labor costs too!), then why wouldn't they fire all of their dispatchers?
Because the dispatchers ARE the "taxi company". If you get rid of the dispatchers, there is nothing left except the medallions, which are just an expensive sunk cost. Taxis are quickly becoming obsolete, and in a decade they will be as common as pay phones.
You're checking the code that ships from Cisco before the NSA gets it, not what you receive.
Cisco could provide their customers with SHA-Checksums of the binaries, so they can be verified upon arrival.
a business has a right to refuse service to anybody for any reason or no reason.
This is not true in America, or the EU. I doubt if it is true anywhere else either.
All this can do is tell you if people expect to need it in the future
It doesn't even tell you that. I use Python, but I have never looked at a Python tutorial. The language is simple and the syntax is obvious. But when I was learning Objective-C, I had to go thru 3 tutorials just to understand memory management.
Microsoft now owns Minecraft and they can do whatever they want with it. They may be using Python now, but that can change in a heartbeat.
Then the school is free to dump Minecraft and move to something else. They didn't use Python because of Minecraft. They had already decided to teach Python, and then picked Minecraft because it used Python. The students also write Python plug-ins for FreeCAD and print their projects on a 3D printer. There are plenty of other options.
Btw, you can write Minecraft plug-ins in languages other than Python, including C++ and Java. You may be able to use C# or VB as well.
Its Microsoft, thats more than enough for some people to FUD the place up...
My kid's elementary school has an after school class where the kids write Minecraft plugins in Python. The kids enjoy it, and even the girls like it since Minecraft involves mostly building rather than just boy-oriented destruction. I don't see how this creates any lock-in for Microsoft, since the skills are portable, and Microsoft doesn't control Python. Microsoft may get some small advantage from this, but the kids benefit more.
Get us commoners to eat insects while the ruling class gets steak.
My chickens eat insects, while I eat eggs. I turn over a few square meters of topsoil and compost each day, so they can eat the bugs and worms. They also eat table scraps, and a few scoops of commercial laying pellets.
Then how do 95 percent of MacBook users set up Wi-Fi on their home routers?
I use a 7 year old USB-to-CAT5 dongle. Since then, my wife, daughter, son, and I, have collectively owned more than a dozen laptops. There is no need to have a dongle for every laptop.
I'm not saying this is true, but just imagine if it was.
We already have life extension technology. It is called "a healthy diet and exercise". Surprisingly, there is little demand for it.
All I'm really trying to say is that the dongle has to be included in the total cost of ownership.
Since 95% of Macbook users don't have it, and don't need it, it is not part of TCO.
Ok, Einstein. Provide model numbers of the sensors capable of doing what you claim "are clearly easily gathered".
The landing gear use hydraulic and pneumatic systems, and there are already sensors that measure that pressure. The weight of the plane is a simple linear function of the pressure of the fluids in the landing gear.
Either this information is false, or the Belgian minister is an idiot. If we can track them on a single platform, it would be dumb to let them know, because they will move somewhere else. It would also be dumb to tell them that it is hard for authorities to monitor if that was actually true. So I assume this is all false information disseminated as a deception.
Everything that is old is new again.
Except these new rates would not be time-based, but congestion based.
he means politically, Austin is a very liberal city
So? I am not a liberal, but I don't mind them as co-workers. I don't discuss politics at work.
I never understood why they don't just make buildings out of non-flammable material.
Except when they've rootkitted a laptop near you, or used an antenna
Defending against these attacks is not the responsibility of the participants in this exercise, and is not the point of these games. The defense against these attacks includes physical security, and better background checks. Those are not skills that are important in a penetration specialist, nor could they be realistically tested in this game scenario. To find a rootkitted laptop, you would walk around disabling wifi on each laptop until you found the offender. Do you think this exercise could work if any team could walk up and physically disable another teams equipment?
If breaking the rules is allowed, then you are better off simply smashing your competitors' equipment. Soon your "cyber warriors" would all be large muscle men with IQs of 80, because that was the winning strategy in the game. Do you think they would win in a real war?
Really? A small drone flying around, saturating/jamming your WiFi freq.
Except they didn't use a drone. They used a stationary jammer inside the facility, which is not realistic. They were also jamming WiFi, but a real military comm center would have cabled connections. WiFi was only being used because it was easier to run the game that way.
You want realistic games? Nothing is off limits.
The everyone would bring a shotgun to a chess tournament. Games are designed to test and exercise specific capabilities. There are always compromises that make them different from a real war, and rules to prevent participants from exploiting those compromises to "win" in unrealistic ways that would not work in a real conflict. Cheating to win doesn't make you better. It just corrupts the process, and then game is no longer an effective tool for improvement. So in a real war, you lose.