I don't know if you can emit such a blanket statement as "...by modern legal definitions those with it are not competent..." There is debate about this, and at least here in Europe, those with it are more and more living their own lives. The 17-year old daughter of a colleague has it - and she is not only learning the trade of a baker: she is preparing to live alone, in an apartment in the middle of the city. She already manages her own money and her own relationship with various administrative bodies. With her father's support, but still - this would have been unthinkable even ten years ago.
I work for a national research organization ( small country, higher-income part of Europe ). It is different here:
* Research staff and non-research staff, here, too ( non-research = secretaries, lawyers... )
* All software engineers are research staff
* You must not have a PhD, although it helps
* Software engineers can lead in research, especially in our dept., which focuses on networks, security and some types and aspects of software / programming
* Direct connections to the good of mankind are not so rare. One of the specializations of this institute is environment; another one is crisis and disaster management
* Most projects are, indeed, rather small. 2 - max. 5 people for about 1 - 2 years is the standard
* You will mostly produce demonstrators / alphas. You will never produce software above TRL 6, for sure.
* I second the part about financial obsession
* It is NOT the same as working with Google, IBM, et al.: it is more laid-back here, you can actually take time to think, and although mgmt. is generally as stupid and incompetent as elsewhere, there is not as high a pressure upon programmers as elsewhere.
Pointless, maybe. Amusing and entertaining, certainly. I am not so certain, however, about its complete pointlessness. Three words are actually very easy to keep in mind. Remember xkcd's "correct battery staple horse".
"Good enough" depends on how you define it. It seems that the arxiv version has at least the central theorems as mathematical expressions, and most of the images / figures the Nature paper has. Good enough for me to get a start on this. I am actually working with an R & D organization specializing in this field, so I suppose they'll let me buy a copy from Nature - even if I despise the whole Elsevier / Nature paywalling practice. Now I'll be off reading:-)
Dudes, in Germany and Austria and Switzerland, these scams have been around for years. They usually tell you that your computer has been locked by the police, and that you need to pay a fine in order to get it unblocked. Nothing new here. News at eleven.
The same as you are. There are not so many places like Slashdot on the internet, believe it or not. I may be naive or overly optimistic, but I do try, sometimes, to remind the/. editors that there are such things as "standards of journalism". Not always in vain, thank fuck for that.
It sports only a link to L. Weinstein's blog, not even to the website of the NYT, although that newspaper is - misleadingly so ! - being named in TFA. Moreover, TFA has only one source. Below par, and so is Slashdot, I am sorry to say, for publishing this piece of emotional garbage and self-promotion for Mrs. Weinstein. Away with it.
And equally importantly, not everybody has to like you, or necessarily
think they have to be liked by you. OK?
Sarah Sharp may be in need of harmony, or in need of what she perceives as harmony, but is just downright and plainly wrong in wanting to enforce her concept of harmony upon an entire developer community. And with the sentence quoted above, Linus is making that pretty clear.
I am in serious doubt as to the veracity of your allegations. Whoever possesses the virtue of honesty does not mention it. "I am always honest" can not be but a blatant lie, at most a clever disguise. Pardon me, sir: you have failed to convince me, and I believe you not.
No, I don't act differently. I don't even try to have sex with people. I actually value this thing called a relationship based on honesty. I know liars find it hard to believe, but you can attract people by just being yourself! In fact, when you love yourself and be yourself authentically you attract a lot better quality of people. You know, people you can respect instead of seeing them as a simple masturbation tool.
There is some sort of contradiction there. Somehow you are trying to make us believe that, no matter when and where and with whom, you, the great Jmc, are always the same. Congratulations sir, that is a near-godlike quality. On the other hand, you implicitly grant that you, the great Jmc, can either "respect" people or else see them as "simple masturbation tool". Hence, you are able to have at least two different attitudes toward people. Which seems in blatant contradiction to what you want us to believe.
We all seek to create representations of ourself, so-called "personae". We don quite another persona when seducing a potential partner than when we work with a colleague or talk with a friend. Facebook has extended the possibility, for John Doe, to do this, namely online. Of course one can choose not to have a Facebook persona, so did I. But having "surrogate" versions of ourself implicitly states that there would be, somehow somewhere, a "real" version. Which one, pray, would that be ? This alone underscores the vacuity of Smith's utterings.
Can confirm this from experience with military telex and morse operation networks on ssb shortwave. Chat, chat, chat 'til you drop dead, just in order not to drop dead from boredom.
Proof: one can arbitrarily extend the existing ones with "the right to have blonde hair", "the right to be infertile", "the right to be able to get a PhD but not pursue it", "the right to drive a car". Which drives the whole concept of "human rights" into sheer meaninglessness. Hence: I call bullshit upon TFA. Any concept that can be arbitrarily extended is worthless. There is no such thing as "fundamental freedoms". Any freedom extant is a freedom conquered, gained by struggle or simply taken. There is only the choice between adherence, and by this I mean: rational, deliberate adherence, to a state of one's liking - and the fight against an overbearing, tyrannic state. This phrase alone encompasses more than half of humanity's political history and, sadly, will continue to encompass much of its political future. Period.
Who is the pope, in the world of 2013 ? A quaint old man with a funny hat and a funny stick in white clothes, wielding no power and a waning influence. As Inglehart put it already in 1997: the importance of religion dwindles with rising degrees of industrialization, and disappears with the transition from materialism to post-materialism. 'Nuff said.
Amen. If the pen is mightier than the sword, then a stream of bytes should be sharper than a Ronin's sword. BTW & FYI : "rogue" includes "US", "British", "French" e tutti quanti altri, not only "Iranian", "Syrian" and "Kazakh".
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if you can emit such a blanket statement as "...by modern legal definitions those with it are not competent..." There is debate about this, and at least here in Europe, those with it are more and more living their own lives. The 17-year old daughter of a colleague has it - and she is not only learning the trade of a baker: she is preparing to live alone, in an apartment in the middle of the city. She already manages her own money and her own relationship with various administrative bodies. With her father's support, but still - this would have been unthinkable even ten years ago.
I work for a national research organization ( small country, higher-income part of Europe ). It is different here:
* Research staff and non-research staff, here, too ( non-research = secretaries, lawyers... )
* All software engineers are research staff
* You must not have a PhD, although it helps
* Software engineers can lead in research, especially in our dept., which focuses on networks, security and some types and aspects of software / programming
* Direct connections to the good of mankind are not so rare. One of the specializations of this institute is environment; another one is crisis and disaster management
* Most projects are, indeed, rather small. 2 - max. 5 people for about 1 - 2 years is the standard
* You will mostly produce demonstrators / alphas. You will never produce software above TRL 6, for sure.
* I second the part about financial obsession
* It is NOT the same as working with Google, IBM, et al.: it is more laid-back here, you can actually take time to think, and although mgmt. is generally as stupid and incompetent as elsewhere, there is not as high a pressure upon programmers as elsewhere.
...and close to that one there are "backup.cringing.sprinkles" and "interception.script.calling". Must be a branch of the NSA over there.
Pointless, maybe. Amusing and entertaining, certainly. I am not so certain, however, about its complete pointlessness. Three words are actually very easy to keep in mind. Remember xkcd's "correct battery staple horse".
Believe it or not, that is what they come up with for my street.
"Good enough" depends on how you define it. It seems that the arxiv version has at least the central theorems as mathematical expressions, and most of the images / figures the Nature paper has. Good enough for me to get a start on this. I am actually working with an R & D organization specializing in this field, so I suppose they'll let me buy a copy from Nature - even if I despise the whole Elsevier / Nature paywalling practice. Now I'll be off reading :-)
Dudes, in Germany and Austria and Switzerland, these scams have been around for years. They usually tell you that your computer has been locked by the police, and that you need to pay a fine in order to get it unblocked. Nothing new here. News at eleven.
The same as you are. There are not so many places like Slashdot on the internet, believe it or not. I may be naive or overly optimistic, but I do try, sometimes, to remind the /. editors that there are such things as "standards of journalism". Not always in vain, thank fuck for that.
Evalimine is a publication, on github, of the software the Estonian government uses for electronic voting. Confusion has arisen on that project ( see the issues ) about the license the guys used who put that code on github: they chose Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License which basically forbids forking. Strange.
"This is ordinary people intercepting... ordinary people". A nice,, bitter subversion of the "power to the people" concept ?
It sports only a link to L. Weinstein's blog, not even to the website of the NYT, although that newspaper is - misleadingly so ! - being named in TFA. Moreover, TFA has only one source. Below par, and so is Slashdot, I am sorry to say, for publishing this piece of emotional garbage and self-promotion for Mrs. Weinstein. Away with it.
And equally importantly, not everybody has to like you, or necessarily think they have to be liked by you. OK?
Sarah Sharp may be in need of harmony, or in need of what she perceives as harmony, but is just downright and plainly wrong in wanting to enforce her concept of harmony upon an entire developer community. And with the sentence quoted above, Linus is making that pretty clear.
“I’m hoping ..... the tool will be used,” Geffner said
You can bet it will !!
I am in serious doubt as to the veracity of your allegations. Whoever possesses the virtue of honesty does not mention it. "I am always honest" can not be but a blatant lie, at most a clever disguise. Pardon me, sir: you have failed to convince me, and I believe you not.
No. Signed up years ago ( see my user ID ) . Optimistic, maybe, or naive ?
No, I don't act differently. I don't even try to have sex with people. I actually value this thing called a relationship based on honesty. I know liars find it hard to believe, but you can attract people by just being yourself! In fact, when you love yourself and be yourself authentically you attract a lot better quality of people. You know, people you can respect instead of seeing them as a simple masturbation tool.
There is some sort of contradiction there. Somehow you are trying to make us believe that, no matter when and where and with whom, you, the great Jmc, are always the same. Congratulations sir, that is a near-godlike quality. On the other hand, you implicitly grant that you, the great Jmc, can either "respect" people or else see them as "simple masturbation tool". Hence, you are able to have at least two different attitudes toward people. Which seems in blatant contradiction to what you want us to believe.
We all seek to create representations of ourself, so-called "personae". We don quite another persona when seducing a potential partner than when we work with a colleague or talk with a friend. Facebook has extended the possibility, for John Doe, to do this, namely online. Of course one can choose not to have a Facebook persona, so did I. But having "surrogate" versions of ourself implicitly states that there would be, somehow somewhere, a "real" version. Which one, pray, would that be ? This alone underscores the vacuity of Smith's utterings.
Can confirm this from experience with military telex and morse operation networks on ssb shortwave. Chat, chat, chat 'til you drop dead, just in order not to drop dead from boredom.
The very same blog post was already the subject of an article on Slashdot last week. What is going on here ??
Proof: one can arbitrarily extend the existing ones with "the right to have blonde hair", "the right to be infertile", "the right to be able to get a PhD but not pursue it", "the right to drive a car". Which drives the whole concept of "human rights" into sheer meaninglessness. Hence: I call bullshit upon TFA. Any concept that can be arbitrarily extended is worthless. There is no such thing as "fundamental freedoms". Any freedom extant is a freedom conquered, gained by struggle or simply taken. There is only the choice between adherence, and by this I mean: rational, deliberate adherence, to a state of one's liking - and the fight against an overbearing, tyrannic state. This phrase alone encompasses more than half of humanity's political history and, sadly, will continue to encompass much of its political future. Period.
in a upon the original article. 'Nuff said.
Who is the pope, in the world of 2013 ? A quaint old man with a funny hat and a funny stick in white clothes, wielding no power and a waning influence. As Inglehart put it already in 1997: the importance of religion dwindles with rising degrees of industrialization, and disappears with the transition from materialism to post-materialism. 'Nuff said.
You missed the point. He asked explicitly for abstractfactory builder facades.This the wayto get one:
1) ask the AbstractFactoryBuilderFacadeManager to return you an instance of himself, by calling AbstractFactoryBuilderFacadeManager.get()
2) ask the AFBFManager to point you towards an AbstractFactoryBuilderFacadeFactory
3) by reflection, investigate if that AFBFF proposes a method getFactoryBuilderFacade( boolean _abstract )
3a) if yes, call that method, you're done !
3b) if not, go back to your AFBFManager and report the problem
4) by all means, learn to code ;-)
You might be right ...
Amen. If the pen is mightier than the sword, then a stream of bytes should be sharper than a Ronin's sword. BTW & FYI : "rogue" includes "US", "British", "French" e tutti quanti altri, not only "Iranian", "Syrian" and "Kazakh".