Don't know where you live, but in my neighborhood you can't get a T-shirt made for $0.01, or even $10 for 100.
As long as there's profit to be made with transport, transport will be used. What we need is to add the externalized costs of transport to it. Cost of relocating 180 million people off the coastline? Divide that up across the cargo being shipped and that $0.01 T-shirt might start to cost more like $0.25 - possibly still worth shipping, possibly not, but we shouldn't let the cost of burning the fuel be deferred to the next generation - if we start charging for it now, we might just avert some of the problem before it happens.
Because: employed by politicians... ultimately they answer to people who answer to the voters. Might kill a baby or something, can't have that if an election is coming up.
Even birdshot raining back down, with bits of shredded quadcopter (including flaming Lithium battery), isn't going to get him the citizens' safety award for the month.
What about drones that are flying a programmed route and have some kind of IMU capability that isn't 100% GPS dependent?
Keep the disruptor trained on it long enough and you'll eventually get it lost due to IMU drift - but all that cutting off comms really does is cut the operator's ability to adapt their flight pattern, like, complying with a bullhorn command to return to base.
I keep hearing about the 8-10lb cargo delivery drone for Amazon, UPS, whoever... Do you know what that monster is going to look like to be able to carry 8-10lbs any distance at all? Blades that will shred small to medium sized animals, for a start.
More importantly: regardless of how cool the product is, the cashflow in the industry is not only restricted, but also unpredictable - not a good combination for a stable career.
The value of secrets diminishes with time, and it appears that any secrets she may have leaked through carelessness weren't leaked quickly enough to be highly valuable to anybody who eventually obtained them.
Bullshit! Obviously there would be a few things that lose value over time but other things not so much. Weapon technology comes immediately to mind. Me thinks you are attempting to be a subtle apologist.
I wouldn't call it an apology so much as a: "Got away with it at the time, mostly by luck, probably best to not repeat the mistake in the future." Like any president (W or O), I wouldn't blame the individual nearly as much as I would blame the staff/system that surrounds them. If Hillary had staff specifically instructing her on proper security procedures, reminding her when she was violating them, and she was telling them to F-off because she is in charge, then, yeah, she should twist in the wind for that. More likely, this is just new tech that the whole upper level political circus isn't completely hip to; should they be? Absolutely! And I think after this little fiasco, they should be better about it.
Presidents used to ride in convertibles with the top down through urban canyons for tickertape parades... they did that for a little longer than they should and finally paid the price. I don't think that use of a personal e-mail account by a secretary of state quite rises to that level of hubris, but it is a very serious matter.
Either that, or she really did leak the identity of dozens of intelligence assets all over the world who were executed as a result of her carelessness, leading to us being in the dark about numerous world affairs that have led to the Chinese overrunning our economy, rogue states gaining nuclear weapons capability, and the Russians gaining access to extra-terrestrial technology from Area 51, but Bill and Roger have orchestrated a coverup so masterful that only a few people living today know what really happened.
The truth is probably somewhere between that fantasy and 100% harmless - I'd guess somewhere near the 99.44% harmless mark.
6 year med programs come to mind... they're highly selective, and the theory is that if you get in and can hang in with the program, you're ready for your residency in 6 instead of 8 years - and these "fast docs" are usually in higher demand, too. Not everybody can learn to be an MD in 6 years, but some can, and some can't manage it in 8, but might after 10 if you gave them the chance.
I think the same applies to software developers. Out of every 10,000 people, I'd bet there's at least one (probably more) who could be an excellent developer at a professional level by age 16, assuming they get adequate exposure to tech education and aren't turned into a socially worthless outcast by whatever school experience they have. That ratio probably drops to 1:100 by age 18 or 20, and I'd guess it bottoms out around 1:10 by age 35, meaning: 9/10 people just aren't going to be great software developers no matter how early they start or how long they plug away at it.
So, what I'm saying here is that your "super school" had better have some stringent (and relevant) admissions criteria, and also be prepared to direct people to other life goals when they demonstrate a lack of ability to become a software developer quickly. Maybe they become a software developer at "the normal pace," or choose another career altogether. But, this goes against the "all persons are created equal, with equal opportunity to succeed at whatever they choose to do" politically correct precept that rules today, and also doesn't maximize profits for the school. In other words: not likely to happen in this country for the foreseeable future.
Beg to differ: I worked with a "stable" of developers who all had roughly equivalent "time in grade" - been hobbying at it since 12-15yrs of age, took a 6 year college degree in it, and then at the age of 25-30, you would think they would have some level of competence. Some did, many didn't. The poseurs tended to change jobs more often - hopefully they find a station that doesn't require real coding or designing skills sooner or later.
What is the bare minimum a code monkey must know so that he can do professional code monkeying?
It really depends. In some cases, all you need to do is be able to set up a Wordpress site.
In some cases, this is absolutely right. I worked for a guy who needed this level of code monkey for awhile. He paid me what I was worth, for awhile, until he found a cheaper monkey that fit his needs better.
Chief among these ways: passing laws to make things that a minority finds distasteful illegal... That's the problem with government, they try to govern.
Not saying she wasn't reckless, and not saying that the next fool that follows in her footsteps will get away as cleanly as she appears to have, but...
The value of secrets diminishes with time, and it appears that any secrets she may have leaked through carelessness weren't leaked quickly enough to be highly valuable to anybody who eventually obtained them.
The other value of secrecy is wrapping up everything you can justify in TOP SECRET clearance, so if anybody does crack a TOP SECRET file, odds are what they find will be worthless, or, if they get a bunch of it, it will take them an unreasonably long time to figure out what they've got. Really tight intelligence systems would replace 99% of coded traffic with intentional misdirection so that leaks are detectable before the good stuff gets out, and I'm guessing this type of security is some of what was missing from Hillary using hotmail.
The Star Trek "post scarcity" economy works for one reason: warp drive. Add to that abundant "class M" planets under-populated by 99% friendly people who look like us and are easy to talk to with the universal suspension of disbelief translator, and you've got a colonial expansion situation with free energy.
When anybody who wants to can go to a nice place to live and "warp cores" and "matter transporters" can build them comfortable houses and set them up with food, then, yeah, no money, no problem.
In post-Eisenhower America, we got something similar: government provided roads - super cheap long distance transport for people and goods. Actually, it's not super-cheap at all, but your commie government provides it from your tax dollars at virtually no cost to all citizens, guaranteeing free access if you show an ability to use the system without other people too often.
Adding one script to git that does a "commit, then push if you have connection" makes it much harder to misuse... you can make the script for your team and tell them to use it only, or just train them to do both steps every time, depends on the audience which approach would be preferable.
I tried training an established git shop to make named branches (they were all in master, and visibly suffering the consequences), it was a hard sell since 1/2 of them were actively interviewing for other jobs.
In 2008, a git fanboi attempted to move me off of svn - at the time, I told him to get stuffed - git didn't integrate with any of the svn integrated tools we were using. The story changed pretty dramatically by 2010, I'd say it was on-par for ease of use (with offsetting + and - on both sides), and it has improved some more since then.
Another DVCS may actually be better right now, but I can't see one with more widespread adoption or support, and that will translate to better integration with your tools (TFS, even), and development that will likely incorporate the best features of the competition before the competition gets much market mind-share.
If you're in a stable development environment, and most of your team is going to stay put for 5+ years, use whatever you want - odds are, if it doesn't work for you completely, you can customize it (I've seen some of this done with git, too). But, if you have a fair amount of turnover, people coming in from the outside, you'll be better off if they don't have to learn your own special flavor of everything before they can be productive.
I've talked with more than a few "little people" the ones that work for a living and live paycheck to paycheck. The media has them running scared, thinking that if they don't vote the next republican in, their bosses will punish them and make their already miserable lives worse. Some of this comes from their bosses, too... but, really, if the media would do half a job in educating people how to vote in their own best self interests, at least half the people would. I haven't seen that, ever.
You see, I'd say git is better for compliance... as a solo developer, I have used svn and git extensively, and there's basically no difference between them - EXCEPT - git works when the server is down, or you are mobile with no connection.
And if you happen to be working collaboratively, you are always branched, so you aren't really forced to merge something back to trunk or get all sorts of crap permissions worked out to continue to use version control - if the branch won't merge easily - F it, it's a branch, it can stay that way permanently.
I'd recommend away from CVS, and even Subversion - to git.
I lived in svn long enough to regret it, git is billed as "scary and hard to learn" but it's gotten past that stage, and the price of not using a distributed version control system is just too damn high.
Real-time video feeds from remotely controlled hobby aircraft was a possibility in the 1970s, it's just that the toy would have cost your average Joe 10+ month's wages. Most people had one hobby or the other, but the cost of combining the two was just foolish, given the risk you are putting the equipment into.
So, today, we bitch and moan about a $2500 pricetag, but even at a "you want fries with that?" job, you can earn the money in less than 2 months, people who went to college and got a degree in something employable bring that home in a biweekly paycheck.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't know where you live, but in my neighborhood you can't get a T-shirt made for $0.01, or even $10 for 100.
As long as there's profit to be made with transport, transport will be used. What we need is to add the externalized costs of transport to it. Cost of relocating 180 million people off the coastline? Divide that up across the cargo being shipped and that $0.01 T-shirt might start to cost more like $0.25 - possibly still worth shipping, possibly not, but we shouldn't let the cost of burning the fuel be deferred to the next generation - if we start charging for it now, we might just avert some of the problem before it happens.
Because: employed by politicians... ultimately they answer to people who answer to the voters. Might kill a baby or something, can't have that if an election is coming up.
Even birdshot raining back down, with bits of shredded quadcopter (including flaming Lithium battery), isn't going to get him the citizens' safety award for the month.
What about drones that are flying a programmed route and have some kind of IMU capability that isn't 100% GPS dependent?
Keep the disruptor trained on it long enough and you'll eventually get it lost due to IMU drift - but all that cutting off comms really does is cut the operator's ability to adapt their flight pattern, like, complying with a bullhorn command to return to base.
Firing a shotgun up into the air... not sayin' your local deputy won't try it, once.
Science Engineering Mathematics Environment and Nature would be seen as sexist.
I keep hearing about the 8-10lb cargo delivery drone for Amazon, UPS, whoever... Do you know what that monster is going to look like to be able to carry 8-10lbs any distance at all? Blades that will shred small to medium sized animals, for a start.
More importantly: regardless of how cool the product is, the cashflow in the industry is not only restricted, but also unpredictable - not a good combination for a stable career.
So, a chaotically orbiting asteroid belt can't accomplish the same thing?
The value of secrets diminishes with time, and it appears that any secrets she may have leaked through carelessness weren't leaked quickly enough to be highly valuable to anybody who eventually obtained them.
Bullshit! Obviously there would be a few things that lose value over time but other things not so much. Weapon technology comes immediately to mind. Me thinks you are attempting to be a subtle apologist.
I wouldn't call it an apology so much as a: "Got away with it at the time, mostly by luck, probably best to not repeat the mistake in the future." Like any president (W or O), I wouldn't blame the individual nearly as much as I would blame the staff/system that surrounds them. If Hillary had staff specifically instructing her on proper security procedures, reminding her when she was violating them, and she was telling them to F-off because she is in charge, then, yeah, she should twist in the wind for that. More likely, this is just new tech that the whole upper level political circus isn't completely hip to; should they be? Absolutely! And I think after this little fiasco, they should be better about it.
Presidents used to ride in convertibles with the top down through urban canyons for tickertape parades... they did that for a little longer than they should and finally paid the price. I don't think that use of a personal e-mail account by a secretary of state quite rises to that level of hubris, but it is a very serious matter.
Either that, or she really did leak the identity of dozens of intelligence assets all over the world who were executed as a result of her carelessness, leading to us being in the dark about numerous world affairs that have led to the Chinese overrunning our economy, rogue states gaining nuclear weapons capability, and the Russians gaining access to extra-terrestrial technology from Area 51, but Bill and Roger have orchestrated a coverup so masterful that only a few people living today know what really happened.
The truth is probably somewhere between that fantasy and 100% harmless - I'd guess somewhere near the 99.44% harmless mark.
6 year med programs come to mind... they're highly selective, and the theory is that if you get in and can hang in with the program, you're ready for your residency in 6 instead of 8 years - and these "fast docs" are usually in higher demand, too. Not everybody can learn to be an MD in 6 years, but some can, and some can't manage it in 8, but might after 10 if you gave them the chance.
I think the same applies to software developers. Out of every 10,000 people, I'd bet there's at least one (probably more) who could be an excellent developer at a professional level by age 16, assuming they get adequate exposure to tech education and aren't turned into a socially worthless outcast by whatever school experience they have. That ratio probably drops to 1:100 by age 18 or 20, and I'd guess it bottoms out around 1:10 by age 35, meaning: 9/10 people just aren't going to be great software developers no matter how early they start or how long they plug away at it.
So, what I'm saying here is that your "super school" had better have some stringent (and relevant) admissions criteria, and also be prepared to direct people to other life goals when they demonstrate a lack of ability to become a software developer quickly. Maybe they become a software developer at "the normal pace," or choose another career altogether. But, this goes against the "all persons are created equal, with equal opportunity to succeed at whatever they choose to do" politically correct precept that rules today, and also doesn't maximize profits for the school. In other words: not likely to happen in this country for the foreseeable future.
Beg to differ: I worked with a "stable" of developers who all had roughly equivalent "time in grade" - been hobbying at it since 12-15yrs of age, took a 6 year college degree in it, and then at the age of 25-30, you would think they would have some level of competence. Some did, many didn't. The poseurs tended to change jobs more often - hopefully they find a station that doesn't require real coding or designing skills sooner or later.
What is the bare minimum a code monkey must know so that he can do professional code monkeying?
It really depends. In some cases, all you need to do is be able to set up a Wordpress site.
In some cases, this is absolutely right. I worked for a guy who needed this level of code monkey for awhile. He paid me what I was worth, for awhile, until he found a cheaper monkey that fit his needs better.
I'd restate the need: "Can a new type of school churn out developers better?"
The usual pick any 2 of 3 dimensions for "better" apply: Faster, Cheaper, Higher Quality.
the way in which they'll screw over law-abiding
Chief among these ways: passing laws to make things that a minority finds distasteful illegal... That's the problem with government, they try to govern.
Not saying she wasn't reckless, and not saying that the next fool that follows in her footsteps will get away as cleanly as she appears to have, but...
The value of secrets diminishes with time, and it appears that any secrets she may have leaked through carelessness weren't leaked quickly enough to be highly valuable to anybody who eventually obtained them.
The other value of secrecy is wrapping up everything you can justify in TOP SECRET clearance, so if anybody does crack a TOP SECRET file, odds are what they find will be worthless, or, if they get a bunch of it, it will take them an unreasonably long time to figure out what they've got. Really tight intelligence systems would replace 99% of coded traffic with intentional misdirection so that leaks are detectable before the good stuff gets out, and I'm guessing this type of security is some of what was missing from Hillary using hotmail.
And who is spending the most on the candidates this election cycle?
(Hint: it ends with "anks" and doesn't start with Tom.)
Pretty sure he couldn't have afforded the drugs, or lifestyle, that led to the insanity before...
O.K. so I read the edit and somehow still missed a word: without "killing" other people too often.
The Star Trek "post scarcity" economy works for one reason: warp drive. Add to that abundant "class M" planets under-populated by 99% friendly people who look like us and are easy to talk to with the universal suspension of disbelief translator, and you've got a colonial expansion situation with free energy.
When anybody who wants to can go to a nice place to live and "warp cores" and "matter transporters" can build them comfortable houses and set them up with food, then, yeah, no money, no problem.
In post-Eisenhower America, we got something similar: government provided roads - super cheap long distance transport for people and goods. Actually, it's not super-cheap at all, but your commie government provides it from your tax dollars at virtually no cost to all citizens, guaranteeing free access if you show an ability to use the system without other people too often.
Adding one script to git that does a "commit, then push if you have connection" makes it much harder to misuse... you can make the script for your team and tell them to use it only, or just train them to do both steps every time, depends on the audience which approach would be preferable.
I tried training an established git shop to make named branches (they were all in master, and visibly suffering the consequences), it was a hard sell since 1/2 of them were actively interviewing for other jobs.
In 2008, a git fanboi attempted to move me off of svn - at the time, I told him to get stuffed - git didn't integrate with any of the svn integrated tools we were using. The story changed pretty dramatically by 2010, I'd say it was on-par for ease of use (with offsetting + and - on both sides), and it has improved some more since then.
Another DVCS may actually be better right now, but I can't see one with more widespread adoption or support, and that will translate to better integration with your tools (TFS, even), and development that will likely incorporate the best features of the competition before the competition gets much market mind-share.
If you're in a stable development environment, and most of your team is going to stay put for 5+ years, use whatever you want - odds are, if it doesn't work for you completely, you can customize it (I've seen some of this done with git, too). But, if you have a fair amount of turnover, people coming in from the outside, you'll be better off if they don't have to learn your own special flavor of everything before they can be productive.
I've talked with more than a few "little people" the ones that work for a living and live paycheck to paycheck. The media has them running scared, thinking that if they don't vote the next republican in, their bosses will punish them and make their already miserable lives worse. Some of this comes from their bosses, too... but, really, if the media would do half a job in educating people how to vote in their own best self interests, at least half the people would. I haven't seen that, ever.
You see, I'd say git is better for compliance... as a solo developer, I have used svn and git extensively, and there's basically no difference between them - EXCEPT - git works when the server is down, or you are mobile with no connection.
And if you happen to be working collaboratively, you are always branched, so you aren't really forced to merge something back to trunk or get all sorts of crap permissions worked out to continue to use version control - if the branch won't merge easily - F it, it's a branch, it can stay that way permanently.
I'd recommend away from CVS, and even Subversion - to git.
I lived in svn long enough to regret it, git is billed as "scary and hard to learn" but it's gotten past that stage, and the price of not using a distributed version control system is just too damn high.
Real-time video feeds from remotely controlled hobby aircraft was a possibility in the 1970s, it's just that the toy would have cost your average Joe 10+ month's wages. Most people had one hobby or the other, but the cost of combining the two was just foolish, given the risk you are putting the equipment into.
So, today, we bitch and moan about a $2500 pricetag, but even at a "you want fries with that?" job, you can earn the money in less than 2 months, people who went to college and got a degree in something employable bring that home in a biweekly paycheck.