That magic process does not exist. You always need competent people to get good results. And you always need to be able to trust the people that work for you.
The implication is the other way round (why do people even here do not get how that works?): You pay peanuts, you get monkeys. If you get monkeys, you may or may not have paid peanuts, that is not specified by the implication. There is a lot of high-priced consulting out there that delivers really bad results. But the ones that deliver really good results are also asking high rates, although typically not as high.
Indeed. I would go so far to say that the pool of available competent people has not really expanded at all. It may actually be shrinking, because the competent ones get lumped in with the vast incompetent masses and get treated as badly. Smart people will avoid IT just because of that. And while I have managed to avoid this, I have to say that I got lucky in addition to being competent. If, for example, you bury people in bureaucracy, competent people will just go under even faster than the incompetent ones. Hence I cannot really recommend going into the IT field.
It is more like 1 high performer instead of 30 low performers from my observations. And the problem with IT folks usually is that they are not _engineers_. They lack the mind-set. A proper engineer that has specialized in a narrow field can still learn another field or go broader, because they have a solid engineering foundation. Sure, takes some time, but most IT folks are true 1-trick ponies and no good engineer is ever that restricted.
Your problem is that you are the incompetent moron (and coward) here and I am an actual expert. Of course anything I say must appear as utterly wrong to you.
In engineering, being right is essential and trumps everything else
Spoken like an armchair engineer.
You wish.
Woe betide the engineer who ignores human factors.
You are the one saying anything about ignoring human factors. Makes you the amateur here. There are different ways to handle human factors and there are different human factors. Communication with other engineers is vastly different to communicating with users and that is vastly different to designing for users.
Being polite is professional but optional.
Generally no. If you get your ass fired for being an insufferable asshole, it doesn't matter how right you are because no one will hear your rightness. Like a poor engineer you ignored the human factors.
If your bridges collapse and your houses burn down, having been polite will not keep you out of prison... But I can see you are one of those that only user their intelligence to justify their misconceptions and never to examine them.
Actually, if you have somebody really good, then they can handle all of that in one person, no gateway, no additional layers. But you can expect them to not work for the laughable money developers get paid these days. If you look at proper established engineering fields and then compare with IT, you find the difference pretty extreme. Incompetence and very, very narrow competence seems to be the norm in IT, not the exception as in proper engineering. IT has to overcome that, but it will also mean no more cheap coders (that end up costing a lot more) and somehow the about as incompetent IT management cannot handle that.
Reflection. Some idiot holding a piece of metal in the laser-path. It will happen. The glasses are fore show, though, they are just to avoid the lawsuits from the idiot blinding himself.
Indeed. In sane countries you cannot even get more than 5mW without being a certified laser-safety expert. That laser is like a chainsaw without any safety.
But they all stem (in part) from the same root-cause: A slow realization that IT personnel is routinely not very good and that you would need far less IT people if the were really good. Of course, the usual implementation does it completely wrong by paying peanuts and then being surprised when they get monkeys.
We have automation. It is both hugely useful and hugely problematic. We do not have AI and we do not even have the first clue how to build it or whether it is even possible. So stop worrying about AI and start thinking about how we can use automation to its present potential without destroying society. Because that will be a challenge.
I should add that from an European perspective, both Republicans and Democrats are conservatives...
The problem is, however, not being conservative, the problem is not taking responsibility for your actions and mistakes. Decent people have gotten really rare. The few remaining ones you find all over the place.
As AI is also 100% imagined, it will die out when it constantly fails to deliver. Automation is a different animal and it will be a huge success and take a lot of jobs (my estimate: 70-90% gone without replacements), but AI is just a fantasy at this time. Maybe we will have something in 50 years, but certainly not before and likely not even then. "Never" is a very real possibility as well.
While I do not have kids, this is the absolute worst-case I can imagine. Alexa is 100% fake, no personality, no insight, nothing. Now, Alexa as an imaginary friend in addition to actual friends and maybe a pet can be acceptable. But as main "friend"? No. Just no.
Slashdot Mirror
That magic process does not exist. You always need competent people to get good results. And you always need to be able to trust the people that work for you.
Indeed. Somehow the most critical people are treated as the most expendable ones. It boggles the mind.
You must be one of those that write papers I then get to reject....
The implication is the other way round (why do people even here do not get how that works?): You pay peanuts, you get monkeys. If you get monkeys, you may or may not have paid peanuts, that is not specified by the implication. There is a lot of high-priced consulting out there that delivers really bad results. But the ones that deliver really good results are also asking high rates, although typically not as high.
Indeed. I would go so far to say that the pool of available competent people has not really expanded at all. It may actually be shrinking, because the competent ones get lumped in with the vast incompetent masses and get treated as badly. Smart people will avoid IT just because of that. And while I have managed to avoid this, I have to say that I got lucky in addition to being competent. If, for example, you bury people in bureaucracy, competent people will just go under even faster than the incompetent ones. Hence I cannot really recommend going into the IT field.
It is more like 1 high performer instead of 30 low performers from my observations. And the problem with IT folks usually is that they are not _engineers_. They lack the mind-set. A proper engineer that has specialized in a narrow field can still learn another field or go broader, because they have a solid engineering foundation. Sure, takes some time, but most IT folks are true 1-trick ponies and no good engineer is ever that restricted.
Indeed.
True. And with the abysmal state IT is in these days, I do not really see a way around that regulation.
Your problem is that you are the incompetent moron (and coward) here and I am an actual expert. Of course anything I say must appear as utterly wrong to you.
In engineering, being right is essential and trumps everything else
Spoken like an armchair engineer.
You wish.
Woe betide the engineer who ignores human factors.
You are the one saying anything about ignoring human factors. Makes you the amateur here. There are different ways to handle human factors and there are different human factors. Communication with other engineers is vastly different to communicating with users and that is vastly different to designing for users.
Being polite is professional but optional.
Generally no. If you get your ass fired for being an insufferable asshole, it doesn't matter how right you are because no one will hear your rightness. Like a poor engineer you ignored the human factors.
If your bridges collapse and your houses burn down, having been polite will not keep you out of prison...
But I can see you are one of those that only user their intelligence to justify their misconceptions and never to examine them.
I would actually not mind you morons doing it to yourself, but I and a lot of others not responsible for this are sitting in the same boat.
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." - Tacitus
Also applies to projects of any kind.
Actually, if you have somebody really good, then they can handle all of that in one person, no gateway, no additional layers. But you can expect them to not work for the laughable money developers get paid these days. If you look at proper established engineering fields and then compare with IT, you find the difference pretty extreme. Incompetence and very, very narrow competence seems to be the norm in IT, not the exception as in proper engineering. IT has to overcome that, but it will also mean no more cheap coders (that end up costing a lot more) and somehow the about as incompetent IT management cannot handle that.
And leave the field to insighless morons like you? No.
The definitions are pretty much non-disputed among actual experts and they do not match your made-up one.
We do not see Linus reacting to it....
It is a $2400 lighter, that is pretty dangerous compared to a normal lighter in addition. A product for idiots with money.
Reflection. Some idiot holding a piece of metal in the laser-path. It will happen. The glasses are fore show, though, they are just to avoid the lawsuits from the idiot blinding himself.
Indeed. In sane countries you cannot even get more than 5mW without being a certified laser-safety expert. That laser is like a chainsaw without any safety.
But they all stem (in part) from the same root-cause: A slow realization that IT personnel is routinely not very good and that you would need far less IT people if the were really good. Of course, the usual implementation does it completely wrong by paying peanuts and then being surprised when they get monkeys.
We have automation. It is both hugely useful and hugely problematic. We do not have AI and we do not even have the first clue how to build it or whether it is even possible. So stop worrying about AI and start thinking about how we can use automation to its present potential without destroying society. Because that will be a challenge.
The "standard stack" is below everything because it is the only thing that works. Countless alternatives have been tried, all failures.
There are no "electronic brains".
I should add that from an European perspective, both Republicans and Democrats are conservatives...
The problem is, however, not being conservative, the problem is not taking responsibility for your actions and mistakes. Decent people have gotten really rare. The few remaining ones you find all over the place.
As AI is also 100% imagined, it will die out when it constantly fails to deliver. Automation is a different animal and it will be a huge success and take a lot of jobs (my estimate: 70-90% gone without replacements), but AI is just a fantasy at this time. Maybe we will have something in 50 years, but certainly not before and likely not even then. "Never" is a very real possibility as well.
While I do not have kids, this is the absolute worst-case I can imagine. Alexa is 100% fake, no personality, no insight, nothing. Now, Alexa as an imaginary friend in addition to actual friends and maybe a pet can be acceptable. But as main "friend"? No. Just no.