This was kinda my origional point. Yes, if I spent all day refreshing pages I could probably get lucky, but I just don't want one that bad. Clearly they are still in short supply, and clearly people are doing just that (refreshing the page and snatching them up as soon as they become available). If I did buy one now, it would probably sit in a box for a few months anyway, so I'll let the guys who really want one get theirs, then when (if ever) they are properly stocked, I'll get one (or probably like 5).
Dunno about you guys, but says availability 0 when I go there.. with a note in red saying:
*Please note that due to extreme demand and short supply, the estimated delivery time is uncertain and will likely take several months. We do regret the delay and inconvenience this may cause.
Forgot to add, this guy put it way better than me a while ago (yes, I bookmark slashdot comments that are particularily helpful.. it comes in useful surprisingly often):
As programmers its an easy trap to fall into thinking that better code always translates into those dollars and cents management seems so hung up on. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Yes, some bad managers are too short term focused, but being able to do the math and figure out if the cost of cleaning up some code is going to be justified in the long run is part of a managers role.
Telling management you want to re-write everything is a programmers perogative. Accepting it when the manager comes back and says "what we have now works, our customers arn't complaining, the thing is end of life in 2 years, and even if this made future maintenance free it wouldn't be worth it" is a reality.
It's something I'm passively interested in. I'm sure if I really applied myself or did some searching I could get one, but as it stands I'm waiting until I can just buy one of the damn things like I'd buy anything else.
Any time I check the few that will ship one to Canada (already adding cost to something who's big appeal is being really cheap) I'm greeted with a "notify me when available" link.
Personally I doubt this test is measuring coding speed.
45 minutes is probably plenty of time. They've probably structured it so anyone competant for the position will probably be able to do it with time to spare. The goal then I suspect is to weed out non or bad programmers prior to doing the proper interview where actual skills will be assessed. This feels like an initial "you must be this good to enter" test more than a "how many SLOCS an hour are you going to give us" test.
Typically prior work is used for this purpose, but I could see this being valuable as a "you must be this competant before we will bother talking to you seriously" type test.
Also without knowing the scale of the coding assignment, we can't know if 45 minutes is barely enough time or a very reasonable amount of time.
If you know a way to stop somebody with equal effectiveness in a way that is less likely to kill them, I'm all ears.
That seems to be the big hurtle. Most of the solutions in the whole non-deadly weapon scene look like jokes which might work in a very lucky circumstance. They range from guns that shoot sticky glue like substances to paintball guns that fire balls of pepper. No sane person is going to bet their life on something like that.
Taser is as close as we have come I think. They get a lot of grief from being over used, but as an alternative to a gun, they are pretty damn effective. I'd rather the officer tackle me than taze me, but I'd rather him taze me than shoot me..
Apparently "shock sticks" were also extremely effective.. but the public backlash was so intense they had to lose them.
I'll admit I haven't done this yet (can't get my hands on one!) but I plan to use two as a cheap drivers for my 5'th and 6'th monitor. Currently I'm using an old (AMD sempton 7something) box to do this, but a Raspberry Pi should do nicely (all I really need is an X server as I just forward the apps to the display currently..)
This isn't a troll but a legitimate question. I used to love discovery, but they were going all reality TV about when I cut the cable. They also had a tendancy to play the same lineup all week which drove me crazy (I get that I can't have new content every day, but at least give me variety in the reruns!).
Been thinking about getting cable again as it comes really cheap with an fibre internet bundle I'm looking at and I miss the whole "just watch whatever is on" experience.
Yeah, but redesigning something that has been around forever is hard (see: IPv4). Way too much legacy stuff out there dependant on the messed up way IRC works.
That said, gradual introduction of saner behavior is possible (see: Atheme/IRCv3).
If you build something from scratch you'll just end up with a potentially technically improved (or just broken in different ways) but largely ignored solution (and for this, see: jabber conference!)
Same time, the pressure of "zomg the boss will totally flip out on you and rip you 10 new ones infront of everyone if you fuck up" might be motivating;p
I _wish_ management where I am cared about quality at this level. It would be worth getting chewed out once in a while to know that stupid bugs are not tolerated.
I've seen it. Nothing crazy or particularly unusual about it.
Big thing with ADA is the focus on reducing errors. Very strongly typed with a lot of compile time checking and strong run time checks (and the ability to handle them gracefully). It seems to be used in environments where reliability and error free execution are critical: defense, aviation (the planes and air traffic control), etc. I've never heard of it used in the medical field but it would make sense.
Like anything else though there is of course trade offs to support this. Plus because ADA is expensive (yes yes, I know, GNAT..) and people who know it are rare and expensive. This seems to have turned it into a niche language.
Also the ADA community in general are an unusual bunch. There is almost an apple level fanboyism going on.. it's weird.
I actually find in some cases this reduces readability.
If it's a very encapsolated chunk of code or a chunk that can be reused elsewhere and has a very clear "x goes in, y comes out" feel then fine. At a certain point though you end up with a bunch of functions that are only called from one spot, are too specific for reuse, and the only thing you gain is a requirement for the programmer to do a lot of scrolling. You also add overhead, but I'm not one to mind a little overhead for maintainability.
Much as it goes against a lot of traditional teaching and widely held rules, I tend to think that sometimes a large function actually ends up being more readable because the programmer can just read through step by step what is happening without the need to jump around.
Even simple stuff like version control and bug tracking.. a lot of guys coming out of school who have never even heard the terms, much less learnt how to employ them effectively.
But then it comes down to the whole "university isn't a trade school" thing, even though most people taking computer science are aiming to be coders.
Those inline comments are good (when done properly) when trying to quickly grok through a large codebase. That "done properly" bit is important. Obviously a comment that just states what the following line does is pointless.. but a one liner generalizing a 9 or 10 line block of code means 9 or 10 lines of code you can skim over.
Obviously if troubleshooting code or auditing you want to focus on the code, but then the comments still serve as a good tool to indicate potential problems by as you said, showing what the authors intention was. If the code doesn't match the comment.. the code might very wlel be wrong.
Also like about 2/3 of the comments, I would be seriously concerned about the earthquake thing and the population thing. I mean maybe these are not as bad as everything thinks, but it seems like the two most obvious reasons "why not" wern't even addressed.
Also am I the only one that thinks it's hillarious that they build a multi billion dollar round thing that basically told them what they really wanted was a multi billion dollar straight thing!
Here in Canada, after Hurricane Juan, there was a lot of roof damage.
Also after the blizzard we had in 2004 (called "white Juan" because it happened in the same year as the hurricane..) most roofs were covered in snow, which I suspect is also not great for panels..). Obviously this is a fixable problem, but the cost difference was my main point anyway.
On the general issue of solar panels, my biggest complaint is around here (Atlanitc Canada) no one will give a straight answer on the actual numbers (at least they wouldn't when I looked into this last). The only assumption I can draw from that is that the numbers suck.
The way to sell me on solar (and I assume this is true of most people) is actual local case studies. I don't care if it works in Arizona. I wanna see the numbers from a place that uses it here. How much did they spend on the panels, and how much electricity did they generate over a year. I have to assume if these numbers were any good the few local companies trying to sell solar would be shouting them at anyone who would listen, rather than trying to talk around them .
Other stuff like "does our salty climate that destroys cars have the same effect on the panels" might be helpful too...
Cost? I don't know if anyone makes a "portable solar array", but I have to assume it would be ludicrously expensive for something that would be used in short term emergencies...
Not having a supply of (properly stabilized non-stale) fuel is poor emergency planning.
This is a terrible apples vs oranges argument. The cost of the generator (even a whole house $2000+ generator) plus cost of fuel to run it a few times a year might not add up to the cost of those solar panels in your lifetime. Also the storm that knocks out power is entirely likely to damage your panels anyway. Arguing solar panels as an alternative to emergency generators is absurd.
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't seem to be any more.
This was kinda my origional point. Yes, if I spent all day refreshing pages I could probably get lucky, but I just don't want one that bad. Clearly they are still in short supply, and clearly people are doing just that (refreshing the page and snatching them up as soon as they become available). If I did buy one now, it would probably sit in a box for a few months anyway, so I'll let the guys who really want one get theirs, then when (if ever) they are properly stocked, I'll get one (or probably like 5).
Dunno about you guys, but says availability 0 when I go there.. with a note in red saying:
*Please note that due to extreme demand and short supply, the estimated delivery time is uncertain and will likely take several months. We do regret the delay and inconvenience this may cause.
Forgot to add, this guy put it way better than me a while ago (yes, I bookmark slashdot comments that are particularily helpful.. it comes in useful surprisingly often):
http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1932550&cid=34743614
As programmers its an easy trap to fall into thinking that better code always translates into those dollars and cents management seems so hung up on. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Yes, some bad managers are too short term focused, but being able to do the math and figure out if the cost of cleaning up some code is going to be justified in the long run is part of a managers role.
Telling management you want to re-write everything is a programmers perogative. Accepting it when the manager comes back and says "what we have now works, our customers arn't complaining, the thing is end of life in 2 years, and even if this made future maintenance free it wouldn't be worth it" is a reality.
It's something I'm passively interested in. I'm sure if I really applied myself or did some searching I could get one, but as it stands I'm waiting until I can just buy one of the damn things like I'd buy anything else.
Any time I check the few that will ship one to Canada (already adding cost to something who's big appeal is being really cheap) I'm greeted with a "notify me when available" link.
Personally I doubt this test is measuring coding speed.
45 minutes is probably plenty of time. They've probably structured it so anyone competant for the position will probably be able to do it with time to spare. The goal then I suspect is to weed out non or bad programmers prior to doing the proper interview where actual skills will be assessed. This feels like an initial "you must be this good to enter" test more than a "how many SLOCS an hour are you going to give us" test.
Pretty much this.
Typically prior work is used for this purpose, but I could see this being valuable as a "you must be this competant before we will bother talking to you seriously" type test.
Also without knowing the scale of the coding assignment, we can't know if 45 minutes is barely enough time or a very reasonable amount of time.
If you know a way to stop somebody with equal effectiveness in a way that is less likely to kill them, I'm all ears.
That seems to be the big hurtle. Most of the solutions in the whole non-deadly weapon scene look like jokes which might work in a very lucky circumstance. They range from guns that shoot sticky glue like substances to paintball guns that fire balls of pepper. No sane person is going to bet their life on something like that.
Taser is as close as we have come I think. They get a lot of grief from being over used, but as an alternative to a gun, they are pretty damn effective. I'd rather the officer tackle me than taze me, but I'd rather him taze me than shoot me..
Apparently "shock sticks" were also extremely effective.. but the public backlash was so intense they had to lose them.
I'm honestly hoping both sides of the gun debate are smart enough to realize how stupid this article is and how little discussion it warrants.
I'll admit I haven't done this yet (can't get my hands on one!) but I plan to use two as a cheap drivers for my 5'th and 6'th monitor. Currently I'm using an old (AMD sempton 7something) box to do this, but a Raspberry Pi should do nicely (all I really need is an X server as I just forward the apps to the display currently..)
If anything you can discover a few new shows you enjoy and download them or w.e. Its good for discovering and rediscovering shows and movies.
Yeah, that's really what I miss.
I will probably get it for exactly that reason :)
Has discovery improved at all?
This isn't a troll but a legitimate question. I used to love discovery, but they were going all reality TV about when I cut the cable. They also had a tendancy to play the same lineup all week which drove me crazy (I get that I can't have new content every day, but at least give me variety in the reruns!).
Been thinking about getting cable again as it comes really cheap with an fibre internet bundle I'm looking at and I miss the whole "just watch whatever is on" experience.
I'm eating Doritos and watching a westerns (been on a weird western kick lately..)! :>
But I _had_ plans till weather got bad.. so I don't even have to feel guilty about it (truthfully I didn't really want to go anyway) :D
Yeah, but redesigning something that has been around forever is hard (see: IPv4). Way too much legacy stuff out there dependant on the messed up way IRC works.
That said, gradual introduction of saner behavior is possible (see: Atheme/IRCv3).
If you build something from scratch you'll just end up with a potentially technically improved (or just broken in different ways) but largely ignored solution (and for this, see: jabber conference!)
Same time, the pressure of "zomg the boss will totally flip out on you and rip you 10 new ones infront of everyone if you fuck up" might be motivating ;p
To be honest, I wish it happened more.
I _wish_ management where I am cared about quality at this level. It would be worth getting chewed out once in a while to know that stupid bugs are not tolerated.
I've seen it. Nothing crazy or particularly unusual about it.
Big thing with ADA is the focus on reducing errors. Very strongly typed with a lot of compile time checking and strong run time checks (and the ability to handle them gracefully). It seems to be used in environments where reliability and error free execution are critical: defense, aviation (the planes and air traffic control), etc. I've never heard of it used in the medical field but it would make sense.
Like anything else though there is of course trade offs to support this. Plus because ADA is expensive (yes yes, I know, GNAT..) and people who know it are rare and expensive. This seems to have turned it into a niche language.
Also the ADA community in general are an unusual bunch. There is almost an apple level fanboyism going on.. it's weird.
I actually find in some cases this reduces readability.
If it's a very encapsolated chunk of code or a chunk that can be reused elsewhere and has a very clear "x goes in, y comes out" feel then fine. At a certain point though you end up with a bunch of functions that are only called from one spot, are too specific for reuse, and the only thing you gain is a requirement for the programmer to do a lot of scrolling. You also add overhead, but I'm not one to mind a little overhead for maintainability.
Much as it goes against a lot of traditional teaching and widely held rules, I tend to think that sometimes a large function actually ends up being more readable because the programmer can just read through step by step what is happening without the need to jump around.
I'll agree this is something I've seen.
Even simple stuff like version control and bug tracking.. a lot of guys coming out of school who have never even heard the terms, much less learnt how to employ them effectively.
But then it comes down to the whole "university isn't a trade school" thing, even though most people taking computer science are aiming to be coders.
Those inline comments are good (when done properly) when trying to quickly grok through a large codebase. That "done properly" bit is important. Obviously a comment that just states what the following line does is pointless.. but a one liner generalizing a 9 or 10 line block of code means 9 or 10 lines of code you can skim over.
Obviously if troubleshooting code or auditing you want to focus on the code, but then the comments still serve as a good tool to indicate potential problems by as you said, showing what the authors intention was. If the code doesn't match the comment.. the code might very wlel be wrong.
* Linear
Also like about 2/3 of the comments, I would be seriously concerned about the earthquake thing and the population thing. I mean maybe these are not as bad as everything thinks, but it seems like the two most obvious reasons "why not" wern't even addressed.
I'm assuming that "liniar" is the key word.
Also am I the only one that thinks it's hillarious that they build a multi billion dollar round thing that basically told them what they really wanted was a multi billion dollar straight thing!
Here in Canada, after Hurricane Juan, there was a lot of roof damage.
Also after the blizzard we had in 2004 (called "white Juan" because it happened in the same year as the hurricane..) most roofs were covered in snow, which I suspect is also not great for panels..). Obviously this is a fixable problem, but the cost difference was my main point anyway.
On the general issue of solar panels, my biggest complaint is around here (Atlanitc Canada) no one will give a straight answer on the actual numbers (at least they wouldn't when I looked into this last). The only assumption I can draw from that is that the numbers suck.
The way to sell me on solar (and I assume this is true of most people) is actual local case studies. I don't care if it works in Arizona. I wanna see the numbers from a place that uses it here. How much did they spend on the panels, and how much electricity did they generate over a year. I have to assume if these numbers were any good the few local companies trying to sell solar would be shouting them at anyone who would listen, rather than trying to talk around them .
Other stuff like "does our salty climate that destroys cars have the same effect on the panels" might be helpful too...
Cost? I don't know if anyone makes a "portable solar array", but I have to assume it would be ludicrously expensive for something that would be used in short term emergencies...
Not having a supply of (properly stabilized non-stale) fuel is poor emergency planning.
Indeed.
This is a terrible apples vs oranges argument. The cost of the generator (even a whole house $2000+ generator) plus cost of fuel to run it a few times a year might not add up to the cost of those solar panels in your lifetime. Also the storm that knocks out power is entirely likely to damage your panels anyway. Arguing solar panels as an alternative to emergency generators is absurd.