It is my experience that reading and understanding code is dramatically more difficult than writing code. It gets even more difficult if it isn't your own code. Commenting, design, layuot, good structure, documentation all reduce this fact but never remove it. I've seen plently of good programmers declare code "ugly" because it had a few warts but in reality they just couldn't understand it.
The angle you are taking is the scariest one of all in the debate over global warming and it is the one I truly fear. Your angle says "Who cares why it's happening, we should change it." That is so unimaginabley dangerous. Decrease your emissions, ok. But "everything in our power" includes alot of very dangerous activites that could reduce global warming and have all sorts of unintended consequences. We do need to know *why* so that we can actually weigh all these options.
Rises and falls in every sector happen all the time. We don't need to over analyze every rise in the market like it's the second coming. Things will inflate and deflate over time in all areas.
The fact is the first dot com bubble burst wasn't that big of a deal. It's not like we had soup lines. Some *speculators* lost money. Enterpreneurs in *speculative* businesses lost their jobs. Really, it had not delitirious effect other than to correct the market and kick out some losers that needed to be kicked out anyway.
Racially divide world. It is a hackneyed phrase that people either:
1. Have their careers invested in (Politicians, etc.)
2. Are too ignorant themselves to let go of. They just continue to see everyone around them as bigots and prejudiced. Irony, certainly.
The fact is that racial divisions, in terms of active, purposeful interracial problems, have been largely stomped out in the realm of actual human interaction. Is there still lingering effects of racial division that existed many years ago? Education? Income? Yes. It does us all a disservice when someone uses their poor inductive logic to say "Racism still exists somewhere so the world is racially divided." When people focus on the real problems, like increasing education for *everyone* instead of hackneyed terms like "In this racially divided world.." maybe we can make the last few steps of progress.
That is because when people ask for a Coke they actually want a Coke. Pepsi is only synonymous in the sense that its what you settle for when they don't have Coke.
my ass. the UN is responsible for their own actions and where they put their people. Lebanon and Israel *approved* their presence? So what. That doesn't mean they should be there.
Senior military officers, staff officers and military observers serving on United Nations missions are directly employed by the UN--usually on secondment from their national armed forces. Peacekeeping troops, popularly known as Blue Helmets, participate in UN peacekeeping under terms that are carefully negotiated by their Governments and remain under the overall authority of those Governments while serving under UN operational command.http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/faq/q8.htmPeacekeeping is a way to help countries torn by conflict create conditions for sustainable peace. UN peacekeepers--soldiers and military officers, police and civilian personnel from many countries--monitor and observe peace processes that emerge in post-conflict situations and assist conflicting parties to implement the peace agreement they have signed. Such assistance comes in many forms, including promoting human security, confidence-building measures, power-sharing arrangements, electoral support, strengthening the rule of law, and economic and social development.http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/faq/q1.htm
Yeah that makes sense when the two sides are actively blowing each other away. Get a clue.
The Lebanon peacekeeping mission was launch in 1978. 30 years ago. The Peace was not kept, they should have gotten the fuck out. They are responsible for putting their troops in harms way.
Maybe the UN should stop putting their peacekeeprs in such a idiotically dangerous situation. Maybe the UN peacekeepers should stop being such fucking idiots and stop trying to "keep the peace" while an active shooting war is happening. UN! GET THE FUCK OUT! We'll call you when we need a clean up on aisle 10.
Yes. These same articles came out every few years particularly during transitions to new consoles. The game industry has cycles. Something new will come along.
The question is now whether you can accept "crap or not" but whether are you seeking understanding or regurgitation.
Your description of "low time high source accountability" is great for well known or well documented topics where you expect there to be some existing accurate source. Things like knee surgery, a particular legal case, a review of things related to some other medical topic. This can lead to a narrow understanding. Essentially regurgitation.
In the case of new or emerging concepts, trends, technologies, etc. when you are researching the keys to finding the really good info is finding keywords relevant to the topic and that relate to finding the cluster of related topics that can give you true and deeper understanding of the topic at hand.
The operation was legal? The operation was planned because its not to much of a stretch from other operations from the last 30 years?
Instead of gasping about how they *planned to do this horrible thing* even *before* 9/11 like a little school girl you should go out and work on the political side that made this even possible. Instead of railing against Bush for using the tools at his disposal you should work on modifying those tools.
This guy sounds like the technical version of the management syndrome though. The guys doing document creation (the analyst) said "Hey I wish this did versioning and comparison better." and the submitters response was "Maybe if we change *everything* we can get better versioning and comparison." Never mind the fact that for Word document versioning Sharepoint and Track Changes does a pretty damn good job and allows many other facets of the process to be handled well, like: Accessibility, central maintenance, easy to use interface, access control at the domain level instead of specific to the repository, ability to create private and public areas easily, discussion area, and allowing the documents to live in a pretty good tool for general collaboration. You just don't get "diffs" which get pretty ugly with prose documents anyway.
I think you are missing the point. The point is that Microsoft implemented the system without giving top consideration to the generation of dialogs on the user side, and instead focused on the security issues. Now, that they have the security nailed down where they want it and they are going back and refining how things are handled to improve the user experiene. The point is, they took a security first approach. While the dialog hell sounded scary when people first started yelling about it, the information presented in this article indicates that work is still to be done in order to smooth that interaction so that the security remains intact but the user isn't unecessarily inundated.
The funny thing is that no one said "Hey look microsoft took a security first approach!" Instead everyone said "Can you believe all these dialogs, boy did they f this up!"
Reminds me of talking cars.
Users ask for an easy to use operating system without it getting in the way.
Users complain about security issues.
Users ask for a more secure operating system.
Users complain about the OS getting in the way.
Microsoft's response? You can't have your cake and eat it too. It sounds to me like their security implementation isn't half assed and that they realize that the closest you get to a totally secure machine is one that isn't turned on and has never been used. Their implementation therefore is going to cause some "Yes You Can Do That" "yes" "yes" "yes you can" headaches.
Sony is as successful as they are partly due to their constant willingness to stand by the "our way" line of doing things. They are as successful as they are partly due to their willingness to make corrections later. Consumer electronics are a guessing game of market needs, desires and wants. There isn't some magic algorithm. They make some misteps, and they succeed in other areas. Hopefully, the PS3 will not be a total collapse type of misstep, but it seems this may be one of them. Sony has a history of forging their own path, the attitude and bravado they have shown with the PS3 isn't new.
If I remember correctly the first "confirmed" price for the PS2 was $100 or so more than the unit actually sold for.
What MMOs are selling is the idea that your monthly fee is paying for things that are new. That expectation was created by the game companies when they said "Pay us $50 up front, then $15 a month and we'll keep giving you new stuff." Every game so far has tapped out the users patience when the user base starts asking "this is what my $15 a month gets? and I have to pay for the expansions anyway when the really big and cool stuff comes out again?".
Acting like an idiot in public can hurt your job prospects. Acting like an idiot in a world wide, semi perpetual, archived and instantly accessible forum can *really* hurt your career.
Lets not couch this in terms of some kind of cultural divide. These people are putting things in public that should be private and then suprised by their own ignorance.
The reason a legislative approach is being taken is because that is the approach the telcos are taking. Technically, if AT&T wanted to just make more money to upgrade service they could renegotiate tiering and bandwidth agreements. No legislation necessary. The thing is they don't want to make more money to upgrade service, they want to use this as an excuse to introduce tiered service. And there are legal impediments to them introducting tiered service. Tiered service is like honey for monopolies and duopolies. It reinforces the only barganing chip they really have which is to not to just say "We're your only choice." but "We might not let you on our network, and we're YOUR CUSTOMER's only choice."
Net Neutrality in my mind is comparable to forcing the Bells to allow other people to sell telephones that hooked into their network.
Honesty in this situation is the best policy. Help them by transitioning them to someone who can provide the service they need, and temper your brush off with an honest statement of your situation. Honesty isn't telling them every boring detail of your life, but you *can* tell them "I am not able to provide the support that you have been receiving as a part of my other services any more. I can either charge you X or you can use Y service/person/some other tech guy I recommend."
You should be charging a fair market rate for your service. A person who calls you with every minor question is a dead give away that you are charging too little. However, if you can't provide good service due to life constraints at any price then you need to transition them to someone else.
Slashdot Mirror
It is my experience that reading and understanding code is dramatically more difficult than writing code. It gets even more difficult if it isn't your own code. Commenting, design, layuot, good structure, documentation all reduce this fact but never remove it. I've seen plently of good programmers declare code "ugly" because it had a few warts but in reality they just couldn't understand it.
The angle you are taking is the scariest one of all in the debate over global warming and it is the one I truly fear. Your angle says "Who cares why it's happening, we should change it." That is so unimaginabley dangerous. Decrease your emissions, ok. But "everything in our power" includes alot of very dangerous activites that could reduce global warming and have all sorts of unintended consequences. We do need to know *why* so that we can actually weigh all these options.
Rises and falls in every sector happen all the time. We don't need to over analyze every rise in the market like it's the second coming. Things will inflate and deflate over time in all areas. The fact is the first dot com bubble burst wasn't that big of a deal. It's not like we had soup lines. Some *speculators* lost money. Enterpreneurs in *speculative* businesses lost their jobs. Really, it had not delitirious effect other than to correct the market and kick out some losers that needed to be kicked out anyway.
Racially divide world. It is a hackneyed phrase that people either: 1. Have their careers invested in (Politicians, etc.) 2. Are too ignorant themselves to let go of. They just continue to see everyone around them as bigots and prejudiced. Irony, certainly. The fact is that racial divisions, in terms of active, purposeful interracial problems, have been largely stomped out in the realm of actual human interaction. Is there still lingering effects of racial division that existed many years ago? Education? Income? Yes. It does us all a disservice when someone uses their poor inductive logic to say "Racism still exists somewhere so the world is racially divided." When people focus on the real problems, like increasing education for *everyone* instead of hackneyed terms like "In this racially divided world.." maybe we can make the last few steps of progress.
We don't need justification.
That is because when people ask for a Coke they actually want a Coke. Pepsi is only synonymous in the sense that its what you settle for when they don't have Coke.
my ass. the UN is responsible for their own actions and where they put their people. Lebanon and Israel *approved* their presence? So what. That doesn't mean they should be there. Senior military officers, staff officers and military observers serving on United Nations missions are directly employed by the UN--usually on secondment from their national armed forces. Peacekeeping troops, popularly known as Blue Helmets, participate in UN peacekeeping under terms that are carefully negotiated by their Governments and remain under the overall authority of those Governments while serving under UN operational command. http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/faq/q8.htm Peacekeeping is a way to help countries torn by conflict create conditions for sustainable peace. UN peacekeepers--soldiers and military officers, police and civilian personnel from many countries--monitor and observe peace processes that emerge in post-conflict situations and assist conflicting parties to implement the peace agreement they have signed. Such assistance comes in many forms, including promoting human security, confidence-building measures, power-sharing arrangements, electoral support, strengthening the rule of law, and economic and social development. http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/faq/q1.htm Yeah that makes sense when the two sides are actively blowing each other away. Get a clue. The Lebanon peacekeeping mission was launch in 1978. 30 years ago. The Peace was not kept, they should have gotten the fuck out. They are responsible for putting their troops in harms way.
Maybe the UN should stop putting their peacekeeprs in such a idiotically dangerous situation. Maybe the UN peacekeepers should stop being such fucking idiots and stop trying to "keep the peace" while an active shooting war is happening. UN! GET THE FUCK OUT! We'll call you when we need a clean up on aisle 10.
Yes. These same articles came out every few years particularly during transitions to new consoles. The game industry has cycles. Something new will come along.
The question is now whether you can accept "crap or not" but whether are you seeking understanding or regurgitation. Your description of "low time high source accountability" is great for well known or well documented topics where you expect there to be some existing accurate source. Things like knee surgery, a particular legal case, a review of things related to some other medical topic. This can lead to a narrow understanding. Essentially regurgitation. In the case of new or emerging concepts, trends, technologies, etc. when you are researching the keys to finding the really good info is finding keywords relevant to the topic and that relate to finding the cluster of related topics that can give you true and deeper understanding of the topic at hand.
not one thing the poster said seeks to justify racists views. not one thing. the poster did say however that "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
The operation was legal? The operation was planned because its not to much of a stretch from other operations from the last 30 years?
Instead of gasping about how they *planned to do this horrible thing* even *before* 9/11 like a little school girl you should go out and work on the political side that made this even possible. Instead of railing against Bush for using the tools at his disposal you should work on modifying those tools.
Nice use of the classic "There is some code in a source tree somewhere that does that."
This guy sounds like the technical version of the management syndrome though. The guys doing document creation (the analyst) said "Hey I wish this did versioning and comparison better." and the submitters response was "Maybe if we change *everything* we can get better versioning and comparison." Never mind the fact that for Word document versioning Sharepoint and Track Changes does a pretty damn good job and allows many other facets of the process to be handled well, like: Accessibility, central maintenance, easy to use interface, access control at the domain level instead of specific to the repository, ability to create private and public areas easily, discussion area, and allowing the documents to live in a pretty good tool for general collaboration. You just don't get "diffs" which get pretty ugly with prose documents anyway.
I think you are missing the point. The point is that Microsoft implemented the system without giving top consideration to the generation of dialogs on the user side, and instead focused on the security issues. Now, that they have the security nailed down where they want it and they are going back and refining how things are handled to improve the user experiene. The point is, they took a security first approach. While the dialog hell sounded scary when people first started yelling about it, the information presented in this article indicates that work is still to be done in order to smooth that interaction so that the security remains intact but the user isn't unecessarily inundated. The funny thing is that no one said "Hey look microsoft took a security first approach!" Instead everyone said "Can you believe all these dialogs, boy did they f this up!"
Reminds me of talking cars. Users ask for an easy to use operating system without it getting in the way. Users complain about security issues. Users ask for a more secure operating system. Users complain about the OS getting in the way. Microsoft's response? You can't have your cake and eat it too. It sounds to me like their security implementation isn't half assed and that they realize that the closest you get to a totally secure machine is one that isn't turned on and has never been used. Their implementation therefore is going to cause some "Yes You Can Do That" "yes" "yes" "yes you can" headaches.
Sony is as successful as they are partly due to their constant willingness to stand by the "our way" line of doing things. They are as successful as they are partly due to their willingness to make corrections later. Consumer electronics are a guessing game of market needs, desires and wants. There isn't some magic algorithm. They make some misteps, and they succeed in other areas. Hopefully, the PS3 will not be a total collapse type of misstep, but it seems this may be one of them. Sony has a history of forging their own path, the attitude and bravado they have shown with the PS3 isn't new.
If I remember correctly the first "confirmed" price for the PS2 was $100 or so more than the unit actually sold for.
What MMOs are selling is the idea that your monthly fee is paying for things that are new. That expectation was created by the game companies when they said "Pay us $50 up front, then $15 a month and we'll keep giving you new stuff." Every game so far has tapped out the users patience when the user base starts asking "this is what my $15 a month gets? and I have to pay for the expansions anyway when the really big and cool stuff comes out again?".
Acting like an idiot in public can hurt your job prospects. Acting like an idiot in a world wide, semi perpetual, archived and instantly accessible forum can *really* hurt your career.
Lets not couch this in terms of some kind of cultural divide. These people are putting things in public that should be private and then suprised by their own ignorance.
yes
The reason a legislative approach is being taken is because that is the approach the telcos are taking. Technically, if AT&T wanted to just make more money to upgrade service they could renegotiate tiering and bandwidth agreements. No legislation necessary. The thing is they don't want to make more money to upgrade service, they want to use this as an excuse to introduce tiered service. And there are legal impediments to them introducting tiered service. Tiered service is like honey for monopolies and duopolies. It reinforces the only barganing chip they really have which is to not to just say "We're your only choice." but "We might not let you on our network, and we're YOUR CUSTOMER's only choice."
Net Neutrality in my mind is comparable to forcing the Bells to allow other people to sell telephones that hooked into their network.
This whole article is really just about the writer's own prejudice. That about sums it up completely.
Honesty in this situation is the best policy. Help them by transitioning them to someone who can provide the service they need, and temper your brush off with an honest statement of your situation. Honesty isn't telling them every boring detail of your life, but you *can* tell them "I am not able to provide the support that you have been receiving as a part of my other services any more. I can either charge you X or you can use Y service/person/some other tech guy I recommend."
You should be charging a fair market rate for your service. A person who calls you with every minor question is a dead give away that you are charging too little. However, if you can't provide good service due to life constraints at any price then you need to transition them to someone else.
thats perfect!
They already did it: Abortion