I'm also amazed at the lack of skill in a lot of "programmers" that I've met.
Would you believe that I'm currently looking for a full time gig? I'm sick of consulting and having to constantly chase down new clients. lol
Current pet project is getting a solid handle on C# and getting used to visual studio quirks again since it's more in demand than what I was doing before (not to mention less likely to cause me an aneurism because I *hate* having to lay out gui's in code since it takes like 80% of the project time to do it that way).
Dealing with the else if statements will generally make you have a 4 part if statement (a[if], b[elseif], a&&b[elseif], !a&&!b[else]) in order to get all of the problem (fizz, buzz, fizzbuzz, and the number if it doesn't meet any of the previous 3). Your solution would miss one of them (a lot of people miss the "otherwise, print the number" part.)
(Here I go playing devil's advocate. I find this kind of discussion to be fun on occasion)
Who's to say that a little "evil" isn't needed or even good? Perhaps preventing all "evil" would be worse than allowing some of it to occur.
Balance is important. Things that are completely one-sided don't generally exist or last if they manage to exist in the first place.
Perhaps man simply sees evil as something he can not precieve the purpose of and does not agree with when the truth is something else entirely. I've known a lot of people who define "evil" as anything they don't like, when a lot of those things are actually good and necessary (death being one of them).
If all good comes from God, and God is omnipotent, then nothing that happens in God's realm can be evil
This is a logical fallacy based on the mistaken assumption that because one has the power to do something, one must do it.
Being omnipotent means that you *can* do anything; not that you *will* do anything. It is completely logical for an omnipotent being to allow something outside itself to exist which also causes things that the omnipotent being itself would not do.
These days, it is perfectly acceptable to introduce measures that are antidemocratic or removing the liberties of citizens. One just wonders when that change happened.
It's been happening for quite a while, but if you want to point at one event that really started taking away constitutional rights, I'd say it was probably when people started taking shots at Regan.
It caused Brady to get shot instead, and eventually (after a number of years of lobbying), the Brady Bill was passed. Instead of blaming the person who did the shooting, they started blaming the guns.
According to his blog, he gave his name repeatedly.
According to Ohio law, if asked by an officer, you only have to provide your name, address, or date of birth. You are in no way compelled to provide documentation when asked.
That's a positive thing. Hopefully the cops in your town are sane.
The cops in the town where I grew up were at the opposite end of the spectrum - almost none of them had degrees and a lot of them started soon after graduating high school. In fact, one of the ones there now was one of the school bullies from my class.
I'm not aware of any company wherein a salesperson has greater influence on the price of an item on a per-sale basis, than the managers and owners of that company.
If you know differently, then please cite an example.
I can actally think of one. Back when I was still in college, I did the purchasing for the fencing team that I helped teach. Having assembled the order, I gave a call to Triplette Competition Arms, and ended up chatting with the sales rep for a few minutes as I related the order.
When she found out that I was fronting the money for the team due to weird paperwork requirements, she gave me the discount that, I later found out, they normally only gave to much larger orders (I believe the lowest level for the discount was $5k, and our order was about $2k).
I got a faxed copy of the order about 30 minutes later (she was very nice and made sure I got a copy of the bill right away so I could start the reembursement process as soon as possible), and I noticed something missing, so I gave a call. It turns out the guy who answered the phone that time was the owner, and after everything was straightened out, we got to talking (they were a really cool bunch) and i was told that I was very lucky because of the discount and that, apart from bulk orders, it's done at the sole discression of the salesperson.
So they are indeed one company where the salesperson has more of a say than the manager, or in this case, the owner (which, for what they're doing, is really good policy).
I know you were saying it tongue in cheek, but I just had to say that I paid a whopping $10 for my copy of VS2005 Standard from Microsoft.
They were running a promo a few months ago where you watched a couple of short films on the web, filled out the form, and paid shipping costs. I just let the films run in the background and a week later, I got a nice bubble mailer from the local Microsoft office with my copy.
"raising hell" to get what you want for free is something a child does, not something an adult does.
There are a lot of times when raising hell to get what should be given is something an adult does. In fact, most major social changes that favor the people were made by people raising hell to get what they wanted (women's sufferage, end of segregation, etc etc etc). The quiet changes over the course of time are usually the ones that don't favor the people. They're done quietly in the hopes that people won't notice until it's been so long that they don't know that things used to be different.
Is that the same as demanding a copy of the software that was included in the purchase price of a machine? It's not that severe of an issue, but it's still trying to take away the right to have a copy of what you paid for (and no, most sellers won't tell you that you can make a copy yourself, nor should you have to. The software was part of the purchase price).
Actually the last Dell I got (2004, so they may have changed), the laptop I'm typing this on in fact, came with recovery discs and driver discs for all of the hardware.
Okay, let me get this straight. You think that not providing someone with a copy of the software that was licensed to them when they bought the computer, and in fact, trying to get them to pay for it *again* is not as bad or worse than someone raising hell to get the CD that they should have been given in the first place?
I would love to discuss the mindset trend in North America where people think it is OK to "get free stuff" by creating complete asses of themselves
I'd say it's right up there with people and companies trying to charge (or even over-charge) you for something that should come with your purchase - like recovery media for a computer (which, I might add, once upon a time came with just about any computer system that you bought) because the software on the computer was part of the purchase and included in the price.
However, on the "should have" and "should of" issue, the problem is that people tend to write in the same way they speak, so "should've" (which is awkward anyway) ends up being written down as "should of" instead of "should have" or "should've"
Slashdot Mirror
The dishes are done man!
Yeah, and the babysitter's dead. =]
I'm also amazed at the lack of skill in a lot of "programmers" that I've met.
Would you believe that I'm currently looking for a full time gig? I'm sick of consulting and having to constantly chase down new clients. lol
Current pet project is getting a solid handle on C# and getting used to visual studio quirks again since it's more in demand than what I was doing before (not to mention less likely to cause me an aneurism because I *hate* having to lay out gui's in code since it takes like 80% of the project time to do it that way).
grr. Like I said, it's late, and I was on my way to bed so of course I typo.
if(i%3 != 0 && i%5 != 0)
Actually, with the question on Coding Horror, the braindead way to do it is (hey, it's midnight, and I'm about ready to head off to sleep)
for(int i = 1; i <= 100; i++)
{
if(i%3 == 0)
cout << "Fizz";
if(i%5 == 0)
cout << "Buzz";
if(!a && !b)
cout << i;
cout << endl;
}
Dealing with the else if statements will generally make you have a 4 part if statement (a[if], b[elseif], a&&b[elseif], !a&&!b[else]) in order to get all of the problem (fizz, buzz, fizzbuzz, and the number if it doesn't meet any of the previous 3). Your solution would miss one of them (a lot of people miss the "otherwise, print the number" part.)
Guess who tortures people for eternity?
I've worked with some people that could probably qualify... =]
(Here I go playing devil's advocate. I find this kind of discussion to be fun on occasion)
Who's to say that a little "evil" isn't needed or even good? Perhaps preventing all "evil" would be worse than allowing some of it to occur.
Balance is important. Things that are completely one-sided don't generally exist or last if they manage to exist in the first place.
Perhaps man simply sees evil as something he can not precieve the purpose of and does not agree with when the truth is something else entirely. I've known a lot of people who define "evil" as anything they don't like, when a lot of those things are actually good and necessary (death being one of them).
If all good comes from God, and God is omnipotent, then nothing that happens in God's realm can be evil
This is a logical fallacy based on the mistaken assumption that because one has the power to do something, one must do it.
Being omnipotent means that you *can* do anything; not that you *will* do anything. It is completely logical for an omnipotent being to allow something outside itself to exist which also causes things that the omnipotent being itself would not do.
At least in India, the authorities have the courtesy to tell you they're logging your keys.
As the first thing that pops into my mind is
"I'm in Ur computer loggin Ur keys"
These days, it is perfectly acceptable to introduce measures that are antidemocratic or removing the liberties of citizens. One just wonders when that change happened.
It's been happening for quite a while, but if you want to point at one event that really started taking away constitutional rights, I'd say it was probably when people started taking shots at Regan.
It caused Brady to get shot instead, and eventually (after a number of years of lobbying), the Brady Bill was passed. Instead of blaming the person who did the shooting, they started blaming the guns.
It's been sort of downhill from there.
No, but by chewing through your rib cage and building a nest inside your chest, they introduce the wild into you =]
Yes, but how many karma points are *gained* by drunken slashdot posting? I'd say it's probably an order of magnitude greater than the points lost =]
Great, just great, Now you are going to get the RIAA ticked off at us. btw, can you use RIAA in a gamer id?
Only if you reallllly wanted to be sniper bait =]
Sorry, your blood alcohol is under the limit for Slashdot first-posting. Please try again later.
There. Fixed it for you =]
I think half of the police forces in the area where I am right now get their training by watching "Cops".
I've actually had to cite law to them before to get them to back off when they were trying to hassle me for doing something that's perfectly legal.
According to his blog, he gave his name repeatedly.
According to Ohio law, if asked by an officer, you only have to provide your name, address, or date of birth. You are in no way compelled to provide documentation when asked.
That's a positive thing. Hopefully the cops in your town are sane.
The cops in the town where I grew up were at the opposite end of the spectrum - almost none of them had degrees and a lot of them started soon after graduating high school. In fact, one of the ones there now was one of the school bullies from my class.
I'm not aware of any company wherein a salesperson has greater influence on the price of an item on a per-sale basis, than the managers and owners of that company.
If you know differently, then please cite an example.
I can actally think of one. Back when I was still in college, I did the purchasing for the fencing team that I helped teach. Having assembled the order, I gave a call to Triplette Competition Arms, and ended up chatting with the sales rep for a few minutes as I related the order.
When she found out that I was fronting the money for the team due to weird paperwork requirements, she gave me the discount that, I later found out, they normally only gave to much larger orders (I believe the lowest level for the discount was $5k, and our order was about $2k).
I got a faxed copy of the order about 30 minutes later (she was very nice and made sure I got a copy of the bill right away so I could start the reembursement process as soon as possible), and I noticed something missing, so I gave a call. It turns out the guy who answered the phone that time was the owner, and after everything was straightened out, we got to talking (they were a really cool bunch) and i was told that I was very lucky because of the discount and that, apart from bulk orders, it's done at the sole discression of the salesperson.
So they are indeed one company where the salesperson has more of a say than the manager, or in this case, the owner (which, for what they're doing, is really good policy).
I know you were saying it tongue in cheek, but I just had to say that I paid a whopping $10 for my copy of VS2005 Standard from Microsoft.
They were running a promo a few months ago where you watched a couple of short films on the web, filled out the form, and paid shipping costs. I just let the films run in the background and a week later, I got a nice bubble mailer from the local Microsoft office with my copy.
"raising hell" to get what you want for free is something a child does, not something an adult does.
There are a lot of times when raising hell to get what should be given is something an adult does. In fact, most major social changes that favor the people were made by people raising hell to get what they wanted (women's sufferage, end of segregation, etc etc etc). The quiet changes over the course of time are usually the ones that don't favor the people. They're done quietly in the hopes that people won't notice until it's been so long that they don't know that things used to be different.
Is that the same as demanding a copy of the software that was included in the purchase price of a machine? It's not that severe of an issue, but it's still trying to take away the right to have a copy of what you paid for (and no, most sellers won't tell you that you can make a copy yourself, nor should you have to. The software was part of the purchase price).
Actually the last Dell I got (2004, so they may have changed), the laptop I'm typing this on in fact, came with recovery discs and driver discs for all of the hardware.
Okay, let me get this straight. You think that not providing someone with a copy of the software that was licensed to them when they bought the computer, and in fact, trying to get them to pay for it *again* is not as bad or worse than someone raising hell to get the CD that they should have been given in the first place?
What color is the sky where you live?
I would love to discuss the mindset trend in North America where people think it is OK to "get free stuff" by creating complete asses of themselves
I'd say it's right up there with people and companies trying to charge (or even over-charge) you for something that should come with your purchase - like recovery media for a computer (which, I might add, once upon a time came with just about any computer system that you bought) because the software on the computer was part of the purchase and included in the price.
allegations of alcoholic astronauts
Excuse me while I put on "To Steer on Mir" by the Capitol Steps.
Are new recruits ready for intoxication session!?
Uh, how about "never"?
I'd vote for just before leetspeak and textspeak start to become accepted parts of written language...
Usually, I'm a descriptivist rather than a proscriptivist when it comes to linguistics, but that's kind of where I draw the line.
It's short for draperies.
However, on the "should have" and "should of" issue, the problem is that people tend to write in the same way they speak, so "should've" (which is awkward anyway) ends up being written down as "should of" instead of "should have" or "should've"