Obama supporting uses gave information on _all_ their contacts to the campaign.
Violating TOS is not the same as stealing.
Facebook putting their fingers on the electoral scale is worse! I'll take 'Cambridge Analytics' over 'Facebook' anyday. But they are both privacy violating scumbags.
I'll take 'brilliant but difficult' over 'idiotic and difficult, but has tits' (when looking for coders anyhow).
It's not black and white. Teams that 'run' like a highschool social click are beyond dysfunctional. People that give a shit are considered 'difficult' by those that don't.
It's true a good team will defend itself as you describe. But beware, politicians lurk. One complete airthief can also destroy a team, unless booted in short order.
Building consensus on everything is impossible if your team is bigger than 2 or 3.
Until they try to get in your way, then Merit includes the ability to get fucking rid of the air thieves while being the minimum dick (that still sends them down the road).
WE don't generally have these issues. It's not coders that do and non coders that fuck everything up. Coders understand all that truly matters IS THE CODE.
Best it to make an offsides analogy without saying which sport. Especially if you can construct it to still be a sensible analogy in the other rule sets.
The place to seek detail is in generally the original thread. Especially when that thread is long. You can sometimes get an implied or explicit TLDR from the new questioner, which earns them a little hostility.
Exactly the same? That's the assumed 'do my homework' case.
Answers are presented in voted order, 'incorrect answers' is an argument FOR the old thread. The new thread, assuming it's allowed to live, will also have wrong answers, but they won't be obvious. You can sometimes learn from suboptimal answers, even if they were suboptimal for the original question, they might be YOUR answer, again why the old discussion is valuable.
I'm not saying the C referred to C# case never happens, but an API question (for example) could reasonably be answered with a different language solution. Sometimes answers assume competence or a shared jargon. That's not specific to any site, that applies to the entirety of human experience. Learn to cope.
The voting system is far from perfect. As a no SO account, via google user (with decades on the keyboard), I find most of the higher rated answers to be pretty good. Like all google searches, sometimes it's a little work to get the right keywords to find your answer. Sometimes your answer isn't out there. SO isn't my first destination, API docs are typically much denser. When facing unexpected behavior, odds are you're not the first to beat your head against a broken API, someone has figured out a workaround.
I'm not typically searching 'homework' type questions. I assume typical CS-101 student questions have a much worse signal to noise ratio, don't have a solution to that. I'd start with a curated set of newbie FAQs. Then start on the textbooks. Then course programs. Seek volunteers from recent A students (they're still young enough to be suckers aka volunteers).
If the question has been 'asked and answered' the reference should include a _lite_ flaming. They should start by fucking searching, not asking. Those who persistently 'ask stupid questions already answered' should be ignored, not flamed. The flames are a bigger problem.
At least part of the problem is internet culture. Don't expect bubble wrap around 'your feelings'. That shouldn't change. Babies should grow the fuck up, or their parents should install a whitelist filter.
'Newer coders' on SO should be asking questions...after verifying that the question has not already been asked and answered.
Even when already asked and answered, in my experience, the question will be more or less politely referenced to the correct thread, often with terse instructions to 'search first next time'.
Where the abuse starts?
When a reference to thread isn't 'good enough', the user obviously wants his homework done and compilable.
When someone posts an incorrect answer, then gets defensive and abusive when corrected and voted down.
But also note: I don't have an account. It's just a resource, typically it's the place to go (via your favorite search engine) when you suspect a doc is wrong or API is broken.
I have noted a bunch of non-technical _bullshit_ in the recent active threads list. There are people using it as a chat room, some are clearly SJW air thieves, looking for fights. They find them, no surprise.
Slashdot Mirror
Nonsense.
Obama supporting uses gave information on _all_ their contacts to the campaign.
Violating TOS is not the same as stealing.
Facebook putting their fingers on the electoral scale is worse! I'll take 'Cambridge Analytics' over 'Facebook' anyday. But they are both privacy violating scumbags.
I'll take 'brilliant but difficult' over 'idiotic and difficult, but has tits' (when looking for coders anyhow).
It's not black and white. Teams that 'run' like a highschool social click are beyond dysfunctional. People that give a shit are considered 'difficult' by those that don't.
It's true a good team will defend itself as you describe. But beware, politicians lurk. One complete airthief can also destroy a team, unless booted in short order.
Building consensus on everything is impossible if your team is bigger than 2 or 3.
These are all shades of grey.
Link please...I really need a 'shut up bitch' t shirt.
Until they try to get in your way, then Merit includes the ability to get fucking rid of the air thieves while being the minimum dick (that still sends them down the road).
WE don't generally have these issues. It's not coders that do and non coders that fuck everything up. Coders understand all that truly matters IS THE CODE.
Dipshit will have rKnockTeeth.exe done anyday.
Companies pay, at maximum, what a job is worth to them.
They won't turn down a good deal, same as you.
The trick is to get that full 'what a job is worth to them', it's always more than they think, initially.
Air Thieves, every time you see them breath in during a meeting you can't help but think: 'Someone could have done something useful with that air.'
It's even worse when they use the stolen air to talk.
It's $10. The introductory price for a really shitty bundle. Don't do it.
Holy compression artifacts batman!
Best it to make an offsides analogy without saying which sport. Especially if you can construct it to still be a sensible analogy in the other rule sets.
Potentially confusing as fuck. Good fun.
This is the internet. Where men whacking it on lesbian chat forums really are gay...there are no women there.
You can pay $10 for a one step speed bump from comcast or you can get it for only $100 and get useless cable TV you won't watch.
The place to seek detail is in generally the original thread. Especially when that thread is long. You can sometimes get an implied or explicit TLDR from the new questioner, which earns them a little hostility.
Exactly the same? That's the assumed 'do my homework' case.
Answers are presented in voted order, 'incorrect answers' is an argument FOR the old thread. The new thread, assuming it's allowed to live, will also have wrong answers, but they won't be obvious. You can sometimes learn from suboptimal answers, even if they were suboptimal for the original question, they might be YOUR answer, again why the old discussion is valuable.
I'm not saying the C referred to C# case never happens, but an API question (for example) could reasonably be answered with a different language solution. Sometimes answers assume competence or a shared jargon. That's not specific to any site, that applies to the entirety of human experience. Learn to cope.
The voting system is far from perfect. As a no SO account, via google user (with decades on the keyboard), I find most of the higher rated answers to be pretty good. Like all google searches, sometimes it's a little work to get the right keywords to find your answer. Sometimes your answer isn't out there. SO isn't my first destination, API docs are typically much denser. When facing unexpected behavior, odds are you're not the first to beat your head against a broken API, someone has figured out a workaround.
I'm not typically searching 'homework' type questions. I assume typical CS-101 student questions have a much worse signal to noise ratio, don't have a solution to that. I'd start with a curated set of newbie FAQs. Then start on the textbooks. Then course programs. Seek volunteers from recent A students (they're still young enough to be suckers aka volunteers).
They're selling bags of dry dog food over the net again. Chewy.com IIRC.
Fucking morons.
Did you feel the same way about Obama interfering with the Israeli election? Why or why not?
That says more about you than anything else.
Sometimes the right answer is 'not nice'.
For example: 'Search the fucking forum before asking your question.' isn't nice, but it is helpful, users need to read it and understand.
Reason? Is that what your trying to do?
People that can't deal with reality, need to live in some kind of figurative 'padded room'. The larger world will not be bubble wrapped for them.
Only be nicer to the women you want to fuck (and her female friends, they often have 'pussy veto' power), duh.
I'm hurt, the compiler said I was bad.
It _literally_ said 'bad operator' to me, I'm going to cry now.
Same as all the nonsense your crying about! Suck it up, grow some balls (or ovaries).
Not TFA. It's buried deep.
If the question has been 'asked and answered' the reference should include a _lite_ flaming. They should start by fucking searching, not asking. Those who persistently 'ask stupid questions already answered' should be ignored, not flamed. The flames are a bigger problem.
At least part of the problem is internet culture. Don't expect bubble wrap around 'your feelings'. That shouldn't change. Babies should grow the fuck up, or their parents should install a whitelist filter.
'Newer coders' on SO should be asking questions...after verifying that the question has not already been asked and answered.
Even when already asked and answered, in my experience, the question will be more or less politely referenced to the correct thread, often with terse instructions to 'search first next time'.
Where the abuse starts?
When a reference to thread isn't 'good enough', the user obviously wants his homework done and compilable.
When someone posts an incorrect answer, then gets defensive and abusive when corrected and voted down.
But also note: I don't have an account. It's just a resource, typically it's the place to go (via your favorite search engine) when you suspect a doc is wrong or API is broken.
I have noted a bunch of non-technical _bullshit_ in the recent active threads list. There are people using it as a chat room, some are clearly SJW air thieves, looking for fights. They find them, no surprise.