I'm with you on that one. I keep my phone n my trouser pockets and the SE is a good size for that. I have a 6 from work and I put it in a jacket pocket, but in private life I don't usually run around in a suit.
Maybe they will bring the SE back. I'll hold back on upgrading in hopes of that.
This is what we call a U-Boot. Next time someone proposes it, then will say "yes, of course... just later".
We could move to a 4-day working week right now. There is enough unemployment, especially in the low-paying service sectors that need constant running, that the hole would be filled immediately.
I've lived a 4-day working week for a few years of my life, and the impact is massive. It is one of my personal goals right now to return to such a schedule as soon as I can afford to do it. You cannot imagine how much it improves your life, health and well-being.
There was little sympathy on Twitter for the millionaire.
This. Fucking arseholes. You think such an income comes for free? You think regular people who do actual work for their money don't get stressed? People who earn your money in a year have higher job demands, so STFU.
Most of the "YouTubers" that I've had any exposure to (thankfully, very few) don't know how to do anything else and have never held an actual job for any length of time. They don't have any idea what life outside YouTube looks like. Most people who have had an actual career understand very well that higher salaries come with higher demands and very often with higher stress levels. We can easily extrapolate and understand that we could probably earn twice as much as we do now, and what the cost would be.
I've been a CEO in my life. I honestly don't want again. I prefer having a life, thank you. I'm more happy now, and trying to get rid of the last remnants from that time, the last requests and demands.
YouTubers, from what I understand, are similar to musicians or actors. Most of them have little audience and very small incomes, but a relatively low number of stars goes through the roof. It's a steep curve with a small tip. So your choice is to be on top or not, there's not much of a middle where you can be comfortable with acceptable stress level and income.
But you know what? That's a choice you made. Give me half a million a month and I'll be happy to work my arse off 24 hours a day seven days a week for a year, invest most of the profit nicely, then retire back to my current job, but live at a higher comfort level because my house is paid off and I still have a few millions in a nice portfolio that gives me a really nice passive income.
Oh yeah, I forgot. I have an actual profession that I can go back to. Poor YouTuber. Maybe spend your money on learning something? That's what smart pro-athletes do, who understand the most clearly that they can't be a soccer player or runner or jumper for many years.
I'm building a home cinema, so this is a current topic.
Speakers are icing on the cake. 5.1 or 7.1 oder Dolby whatever - that is not what matters. A good screen matters, and good soundproofing matters. I'm still fighting with that last, still have too much echo in the room. The effect on sound quality is dramatic, and no amount of whatever tech will solve that, I just need to figure out how to best stop the sound waves from bouncing around.
There is also a brilliant article about the NASAs coding and error analysis practices. I forgot the title and link, it went something like "they write... code". The main lessons there was to figure out actual root causes for bugs.
That's probably one of the most abused bullshit-bingo terms in the world, but used correctly, so powerful. Don't stop when you found the line in the code that contains the bug. Check the revision history to find out when the bug was added, by whom (not to punish them, but to ask their thoughts) and with what comment (i.e. why). Try to understand how and why the bug was introduced. Which wrong thinking lead to the wrong code? How it passed QA? Then fix not just the line of code, but the process leading up to the bug.
Most business monkeys just think that truly professional work takes too much time.
Anyway, it was quite funny, everyone dreaded them instead of thinking why their code is so bad that it crashed in the first 5 minutes when one one of those two touched the program.
Everyone should be thankful to them. If this happens during QA, it is at least one order of magnitude cheaper compared to happening after shipping at the customer side.
Thereâ(TM)s something beautiful and immediate about driving without power steering, ABS, traction control, etc. too, but at the end of the day we need to admit thatâ(TM)s best left on a track, for sport and entertainment, and not every day use.
Yes, there is beauty to actual driving, and if you are a professional driver I fully expect you to be able to drive without power steering, ABS, traction control and all the other systems. Even if I hire you to drive me around in a limo. Because those systems might fail. Because you call yourself a professional. Because it teaches you a lot about driving.
Ordinary people during their daily commute should be supported by as many assistance systems as possible. Because driving is not their profession, it is just a means to an end.
So for scientists doing some data analysis, for executives doing some business calculations, we absolutely need tools and we need easy, fail-safe, protects-you-from-mistakes programming languages. As well as for amateurs, people scripting something in a game, modding their favorite FPS or just wiping up a quick website with a scores list for their local sports club.
Now when it comes to professional programmers, whose actual job it is to write code, we need to be able to pick the tool that does the job, and that can be a different tool for different jobs. And yes, sometimes you need to get dirty. Sometimes the oil needs to be changed or the gears need to be greased. And if you are unable to do that, then who are you talking about "coding" ?
I think it more likely that programmers have become lazy, or just aren't educated enough to be responsible with a powerful programming language
Sadly, that isn't true.
I was the course assistant for the C programming lab back in my university days, and that was in the 90s. I hope that I taught everyone lessons in input validation, but some of those teams I sent back a dozen times (no kidding) because I could make their code crash with unexpected input. Not a number - crash. Negative number - crash. Zero - crash. Buffer overflow - crash. And so on.
It isn't new that programmers are lazy. The core flaw of teaching programming is that you are being taught to make it work. Not to make it right.
Oh, I love C. In my mind, you cannot call yourself a programmer unless you have delivered at least one non-trivial piece of software in C.
Why?
Because C is the no-training-wheels programming language. It is the "I'm not saving you from yourself" language. And more importantly, it is the "I will do what you say, not what my compiler writers think that you maybe meant" language. C will do what you tell it to do, it is the original embodiment of the Unix philosophy. It doesn't second-guess the programmer. If I do that, the computers job is to execute, not to think I'm an idiot and can't write code. I probably meant to dereference that pointer, I probably somehow made sure that it's safe and if the compiler can't see it then it assumes that it is wrong, not me.
Such beauty.
Of course, like professional tools in the physical world, in the hands of amateurs they instantly become dangerous. Don't give a chainsaw to a five year old, ok? Not a good idea. And don't give dynamite to a teenager, or something will get blown up and you don't know what.
So is it dangerous? You bet it is. Does it produce insecure code? Almost certainly because very, very few people can actually handle that stuff safely. And no, I don't count myself among them, it's been way too long since I actually wrote code in C.
But there is something to the beauty and the immediacy of having a computer not trying to think for you.
As much as I respect Pete, he is wrong in his history.
Christianity was adopted in Rome as a power-play by Constantin who wanted to be Emperor but didn't have the public support that he needed. Christianity was certainly the end of the Roman Empire, but it is more like a flu - a disease that usually you barely notice, but if your immune system is down already, it can kill you.
Monotheistic "religions" are all about making people obedient and subservient. They have absolutely nothing to do with actual religion !
You could not be more wrong. Religion is all about making people obedient and subservient. Religion is what the witch doctor and medicine man invented when they understood that sooner or later someone will call their bluff and blow up their game.
This is indeed the second interpretation that I've seen as well. I'm not sure which one is correct, nor do I care especially much. The point is the same.
Yes, because Europe exported most of its prudes to the USA (most of the early settlers left Europe because everyone there was tired with their attitude).
However, Europe also went backwards a lot. Greeks, Romans, Germanic tribes and Celtic tribes all had a much more relaxed attitude towards nudity, sex, homosexuality and every other related topic.
When the christians re-conquered Spain in the dark middle ages, the first thing they did was to close all public baths.
In ancient Greece, people did sports in the nude. The original Olympics were done by men and women (at the parallel Hera festival) in their best age, fit and trained, completely naked. It was certainly a lot more fun than today.
Christians turned Europe and by proxy America into the afraid-of-sex bullshit that it is today. Greeks, Romans, Germanic tribes and Celtic tribes all had a much more relaxed attitude towards nudity, sex, homosexuality and every other related topic.
It is the Abrahamic religions that are guilty in this.
In Germany, there are certain letter combinations disallowed on license plates. You know, things like "SS". Then, recently, there was a discussion to disallow "88", which, surprise, neo-nazis have used as a code to get around all the "SS" filters everywhere...
Humans are like the Internet. They will route around censorship.
A big reason why the problem has yet to be solved is "because creating effective obscenity filters depends on the filter's ability to understand a word in context," reports Motherboard. "Despite advances in [AI], this is something that even the most advanced machine-learning algorithms still struggle with today."
The real reason why the problem exists at all is because we think that we need obscenity filters. Because your childs psyche is going to be irrepairable traumatized if it reads words like "cunt" or "penis", right?
Small children don't care. The worst that will happen is that they ask you to explain what that word means.
By the time they care, they already know what it means.
Not to even mention that this is the one area where humanity has managed to turn half the dictionary into synonyms for the words you are trying to filter out. Good luck filtering that.
I used to do my commute by train, and it was not wasted time at all. I had a book with me and read it, and aside from the good of reading books, it was also a really good frame for the working day, helping me to change my mind into and out of private/work mode.
Currently, I'm forced to commute by car (no acceptable public transport connection). I've switched to audio books and while not the same thing, it does help. However, I notice how much more exhausted I arrive home, because driving in traffic does take constant concentration.
If you are only driving, it's a waste. Using the time reduces the waste, and that part is in your hands.
I've got about 20 more-or-less (many just forward to the same inbox) email addresses on half as many domains. Not counting work e-mail.
Even if you don't run your own server and own a couple domains like I do, it is absolutely trivial to set up two, three, five or fifty e-mails with one or several e-mail providers. In fact, if I didn't run my own mailserver, I'd definitely do so in order to not be fucked if my e-mail provider suddenly disappears or decides to not do this business anymore, or move to a pay model and holds my e-mail history hostage.
Why in the world would anyone have only one e-mail address?
Alternative fix: Someone in a country with a) a non-broken legal system or b) a legal system so broken that Intel can forget about enforcing its "license": Go collect and post the most comprehensive benchmark data you can possibly get.
One thing I forgot: Just because long buyers don't make headlines with the issues they uncover doesn't mean they don't. But as a buyer if I spot a problem, I simply don't invest there and move on to the next stock to check. As a short seller, it is to my advantage to invest there and make my findings as public as possible.
Long buyers don't publish issues they spot simply because there's no advantage for them doing it.
You keep repeating that statement. Unlike the Trump echo chamber, repetition is not equal to truth.
It is true that a lot of long buyers are fonds that don't scrutinize individual stocks and simply rely on a portfolio to gain on average an increase over time.
The only reason that there is no equivalent to them in the short market is that on average, the stock market rises and the portfolio strategy actually works, and wouldn't work on short.
Let's exclude those people and look at those people who either short or long individual, selected stocks. Do you really think that just because I buy instead of sell I don't look at the underlying company? I know that I do and I don't believe I'm a unicorn.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm with you on that one. I keep my phone n my trouser pockets and the SE is a good size for that. I have a 6 from work and I put it in a jacket pocket, but in private life I don't usually run around in a suit.
Maybe they will bring the SE back. I'll hold back on upgrading in hopes of that.
And playing Fortnite on Twitch every day isn't exactly a soul crushing job.
A lot of things that are fun when you do them as a hobby stop being fun when you do them as a job.
But for the kind of money the guy is raking in. Let's just say that there are actual soul crushing jobs that pay orders of magnitude less.
by the end of this century,
This is what we call a U-Boot. Next time someone proposes it, then will say "yes, of course... just later".
We could move to a 4-day working week right now. There is enough unemployment, especially in the low-paying service sectors that need constant running, that the hole would be filled immediately.
I've lived a 4-day working week for a few years of my life, and the impact is massive. It is one of my personal goals right now to return to such a schedule as soon as I can afford to do it. You cannot imagine how much it improves your life, health and well-being.
There was little sympathy on Twitter for the millionaire.
This. Fucking arseholes. You think such an income comes for free? You think regular people who do actual work for their money don't get stressed? People who earn your money in a year have higher job demands, so STFU.
Most of the "YouTubers" that I've had any exposure to (thankfully, very few) don't know how to do anything else and have never held an actual job for any length of time. They don't have any idea what life outside YouTube looks like. Most people who have had an actual career understand very well that higher salaries come with higher demands and very often with higher stress levels. We can easily extrapolate and understand that we could probably earn twice as much as we do now, and what the cost would be.
I've been a CEO in my life. I honestly don't want again. I prefer having a life, thank you. I'm more happy now, and trying to get rid of the last remnants from that time, the last requests and demands.
YouTubers, from what I understand, are similar to musicians or actors. Most of them have little audience and very small incomes, but a relatively low number of stars goes through the roof. It's a steep curve with a small tip. So your choice is to be on top or not, there's not much of a middle where you can be comfortable with acceptable stress level and income.
But you know what? That's a choice you made. Give me half a million a month and I'll be happy to work my arse off 24 hours a day seven days a week for a year, invest most of the profit nicely, then retire back to my current job, but live at a higher comfort level because my house is paid off and I still have a few millions in a nice portfolio that gives me a really nice passive income.
Oh yeah, I forgot. I have an actual profession that I can go back to. Poor YouTuber. Maybe spend your money on learning something? That's what smart pro-athletes do, who understand the most clearly that they can't be a soccer player or runner or jumper for many years.
I'm building a home cinema, so this is a current topic.
Speakers are icing on the cake. 5.1 or 7.1 oder Dolby whatever - that is not what matters. A good screen matters, and good soundproofing matters. I'm still fighting with that last, still have too much echo in the room. The effect on sound quality is dramatic, and no amount of whatever tech will solve that, I just need to figure out how to best stop the sound waves from bouncing around.
But low-tech isn't so hip, so no headlines.
found the old article:
https://www.fastcompany.com/28...
There is also a brilliant article about the NASAs coding and error analysis practices. I forgot the title and link, it went something like "they write ... code". The main lessons there was to figure out actual root causes for bugs.
That's probably one of the most abused bullshit-bingo terms in the world, but used correctly, so powerful. Don't stop when you found the line in the code that contains the bug. Check the revision history to find out when the bug was added, by whom (not to punish them, but to ask their thoughts) and with what comment (i.e. why). Try to understand how and why the bug was introduced. Which wrong thinking lead to the wrong code? How it passed QA? Then fix not just the line of code, but the process leading up to the bug.
Most business monkeys just think that truly professional work takes too much time.
Anyway, it was quite funny, everyone dreaded them instead of thinking why their code is so bad that it crashed in the first 5 minutes when one one of those two touched the program.
Everyone should be thankful to them. If this happens during QA, it is at least one order of magnitude cheaper compared to happening after shipping at the customer side.
Thereâ(TM)s something beautiful and immediate about driving without power steering, ABS, traction control, etc. too, but at the end of the day we need to admit thatâ(TM)s best left on a track, for sport and entertainment, and not every day use.
Yes, there is beauty to actual driving, and if you are a professional driver I fully expect you to be able to drive without power steering, ABS, traction control and all the other systems. Even if I hire you to drive me around in a limo. Because those systems might fail. Because you call yourself a professional. Because it teaches you a lot about driving.
Ordinary people during their daily commute should be supported by as many assistance systems as possible. Because driving is not their profession, it is just a means to an end.
So for scientists doing some data analysis, for executives doing some business calculations, we absolutely need tools and we need easy, fail-safe, protects-you-from-mistakes programming languages. As well as for amateurs, people scripting something in a game, modding their favorite FPS or just wiping up a quick website with a scores list for their local sports club.
Now when it comes to professional programmers, whose actual job it is to write code, we need to be able to pick the tool that does the job, and that can be a different tool for different jobs. And yes, sometimes you need to get dirty. Sometimes the oil needs to be changed or the gears need to be greased. And if you are unable to do that, then who are you talking about "coding" ?
I think it more likely that programmers have become lazy, or just aren't educated enough to be responsible with a powerful programming language
Sadly, that isn't true.
I was the course assistant for the C programming lab back in my university days, and that was in the 90s. I hope that I taught everyone lessons in input validation, but some of those teams I sent back a dozen times (no kidding) because I could make their code crash with unexpected input. Not a number - crash. Negative number - crash. Zero - crash. Buffer overflow - crash. And so on.
It isn't new that programmers are lazy. The core flaw of teaching programming is that you are being taught to make it work. Not to make it right.
I learned years before to NEVER, NEVER, NEVER ignore warnings.
This.
Amateurs fix their code until all errors are gone.
Professionals fix it until all warnings are done.
Oh, I love C. In my mind, you cannot call yourself a programmer unless you have delivered at least one non-trivial piece of software in C.
Why?
Because C is the no-training-wheels programming language. It is the "I'm not saving you from yourself" language. And more importantly, it is the "I will do what you say, not what my compiler writers think that you maybe meant" language. C will do what you tell it to do, it is the original embodiment of the Unix philosophy. It doesn't second-guess the programmer. If I do that, the computers job is to execute, not to think I'm an idiot and can't write code. I probably meant to dereference that pointer, I probably somehow made sure that it's safe and if the compiler can't see it then it assumes that it is wrong, not me.
Such beauty.
Of course, like professional tools in the physical world, in the hands of amateurs they instantly become dangerous. Don't give a chainsaw to a five year old, ok? Not a good idea. And don't give dynamite to a teenager, or something will get blown up and you don't know what.
So is it dangerous? You bet it is. Does it produce insecure code? Almost certainly because very, very few people can actually handle that stuff safely. And no, I don't count myself among them, it's been way too long since I actually wrote code in C.
But there is something to the beauty and the immediacy of having a computer not trying to think for you.
As much as I respect Pete, he is wrong in his history.
Christianity was adopted in Rome as a power-play by Constantin who wanted to be Emperor but didn't have the public support that he needed. Christianity was certainly the end of the Roman Empire, but it is more like a flu - a disease that usually you barely notice, but if your immune system is down already, it can kill you.
Monotheistic "religions" are all about making people obedient and subservient. They have absolutely nothing to do with actual religion !
You could not be more wrong. Religion is all about making people obedient and subservient. Religion is what the witch doctor and medicine man invented when they understood that sooner or later someone will call their bluff and blow up their game.
This is indeed the second interpretation that I've seen as well. I'm not sure which one is correct, nor do I care especially much. The point is the same.
But children still need to learn what it means to offend, and how and when not to do it.
We as a society should learn to offend properly. Which means you should be offended by the content of what I say, not the words I choose to say it.
Yes, because Europe exported most of its prudes to the USA (most of the early settlers left Europe because everyone there was tired with their attitude).
However, Europe also went backwards a lot. Greeks, Romans, Germanic tribes and Celtic tribes all had a much more relaxed attitude towards nudity, sex, homosexuality and every other related topic.
Most of it comes from television:
No, it doesn't.
This stuff is much, much older than TV.
When the christians re-conquered Spain in the dark middle ages, the first thing they did was to close all public baths.
In ancient Greece, people did sports in the nude. The original Olympics were done by men and women (at the parallel Hera festival) in their best age, fit and trained, completely naked. It was certainly a lot more fun than today.
Christians turned Europe and by proxy America into the afraid-of-sex bullshit that it is today. Greeks, Romans, Germanic tribes and Celtic tribes all had a much more relaxed attitude towards nudity, sex, homosexuality and every other related topic.
It is the Abrahamic religions that are guilty in this.
This is not untypical.
In Germany, there are certain letter combinations disallowed on license plates. You know, things like "SS". Then, recently, there was a discussion to disallow "88", which, surprise, neo-nazis have used as a code to get around all the "SS" filters everywhere...
Humans are like the Internet. They will route around censorship.
A big reason why the problem has yet to be solved is "because creating effective obscenity filters depends on the filter's ability to understand a word in context," reports Motherboard. "Despite advances in [AI], this is something that even the most advanced machine-learning algorithms still struggle with today."
The real reason why the problem exists at all is because we think that we need obscenity filters. Because your childs psyche is going to be irrepairable traumatized if it reads words like "cunt" or "penis", right?
Small children don't care. The worst that will happen is that they ask you to explain what that word means.
By the time they care, they already know what it means.
Not to even mention that this is the one area where humanity has managed to turn half the dictionary into synonyms for the words you are trying to filter out. Good luck filtering that.
I used to do my commute by train, and it was not wasted time at all. I had a book with me and read it, and aside from the good of reading books, it was also a really good frame for the working day, helping me to change my mind into and out of private/work mode.
Currently, I'm forced to commute by car (no acceptable public transport connection). I've switched to audio books and while not the same thing, it does help. However, I notice how much more exhausted I arrive home, because driving in traffic does take constant concentration.
If you are only driving, it's a waste. Using the time reduces the waste, and that part is in your hands.
What is this "your email address" ?
Singular?
Seriously?
I've got about 20 more-or-less (many just forward to the same inbox) email addresses on half as many domains. Not counting work e-mail.
Even if you don't run your own server and own a couple domains like I do, it is absolutely trivial to set up two, three, five or fifty e-mails with one or several e-mail providers. In fact, if I didn't run my own mailserver, I'd definitely do so in order to not be fucked if my e-mail provider suddenly disappears or decides to not do this business anymore, or move to a pay model and holds my e-mail history hostage.
Why in the world would anyone have only one e-mail address?
I'm a small investor with a limited time and money budget. I do my due dilligence but I don't go into the accounting.
That is why you may have noticed, no obviously you haven't, that I didn't write the previous comment in first person.
Alternative fix: Someone in a country with a) a non-broken legal system or b) a legal system so broken that Intel can forget about enforcing its "license": Go collect and post the most comprehensive benchmark data you can possibly get.
One thing I forgot: Just because long buyers don't make headlines with the issues they uncover doesn't mean they don't. But as a buyer if I spot a problem, I simply don't invest there and move on to the next stock to check. As a short seller, it is to my advantage to invest there and make my findings as public as possible.
Long buyers don't publish issues they spot simply because there's no advantage for them doing it.
You keep repeating that statement. Unlike the Trump echo chamber, repetition is not equal to truth.
It is true that a lot of long buyers are fonds that don't scrutinize individual stocks and simply rely on a portfolio to gain on average an increase over time.
The only reason that there is no equivalent to them in the short market is that on average, the stock market rises and the portfolio strategy actually works, and wouldn't work on short.
Let's exclude those people and look at those people who either short or long individual, selected stocks. Do you really think that just because I buy instead of sell I don't look at the underlying company? I know that I do and I don't believe I'm a unicorn.