When it's something I work really intensely, I often come up with the best solutions indirectly in a dream. That is, I'll dream of a solution - usually it's not directly helpful, but upon waking it's easy to follow the impractical dream solution to its roots and find the real answer. Usually in a "oh that's so obvious, why didn't I see it sooner?!" kind of way.
Walking is another good time for me - unless I"m listening to an audiobook, which seems to suppress the necessary 'mind wandering'.
resources are finite. To give to one you often have to take from the other.
Not when you have multiple supplies for those resources. So one investor chooses to invest in social media - that opens the door for another investor to stake a claim on the Next Big Technology Innovation. There is a diverse group of investors - and they invest in diverse things. While at the individual level there is opportunity cost, in aggregate there's no reason to think it would work out that way (and the professor interviewed in the article gives no reason or evidence to support that it might).
. We developed those relationships, those friendships, because they share the same passion for development that we do
You have no idea how rare that is.
In a place where programming is a ticket out of poverty, and the larger consulting firms literally snatch up tens of thousands of graduates who are in it solely for the money - graduates who do not have the aptitude to be good programmers - skilled, capable programmers are true diamonds in the rough.
The situation now in India is the same but a vastly higher quantity of incapable programmers is entering the workforce every year. The ratio of skilled to clueless is the same as anywhere - but with the higher quantities it's very rare to find the skilled.
This is no slight against Indian people -- we saw the same thing in the US but on a much lesser scale in the late 90s and early 00s That's when everyone thought it was a way to get rich - hop on board the dot-com bandwagon. The market was flooded with incapable wannabe programmers and it took years for them to wash out (some never did).
If this hasn't been your experience, count yourself very lucky.
Maybe those same people who BUY AND PAY FOR LAWS managed, over the course of a few decades, to get the laws shifted so that the tax burden now falls on working people instead of the wealthy,
Except that the taxes are largely paid by the "wealthy". Yes, they pay less of a percentage of their income, but they pay many times mroe in actual dollars. 10% of the country pays 95% (or 99% can't remember) of all tax dollars.
So no, the "wealthy" are still paying the lion's share of the taxes. And they're still largely the ones paying for the armed ships, planes, troops, etc.
Yes, you feel your higher percentage rate more because it has more of an effect on your day to day spending/living -- but don't let that fool you into thinking that the "rich" aren't paying.
Another advantage you have by not using any of the numerous mobile ad frameworks/apis is that you're not giving away your users' usage patterns and other unknown data. Good choice!
That's something that has always irritated me about the ad-sponsored apps: the app developers (usually) have no concept of how that data is getting used -- and they seem to be ignorant of the fact that multiple app developers using the same framework means that the providers get to build quite a profile. All tied to a specific user by phone number or email address.
People are literally paid to watch sites such as this, refreshing non-stop, and to pounce on new articles the *instant* they show up. Probably some college student making $10 per post or something.
Because for most people, it would be more info that they'd need to ignore. In addition if you're trying to close or exit a document, it means that you're trying to finish a task- not begin a new one like evaluating a document difference.
There is a place for that functionality, but it is something that the user should initiate. Otherwise it just gets scanned and ignored like any other popular. (Literally. Almost nobody reads a popular message or promotion if they didn't ask for it. They typically scan the response options for the one most likely to let them continue with what they want to do.)
On the other hand, how long should a company support someone who made a one-time purchase of software two-years ago, with the understanding that it was being bought as-is?
It's all well and good to say "get over it", but that doesn't address the question.
That seems to vary by practice. My wife has a similar history of sinus infections, and it's reached the point where she can call into the doctor's office andexplain her symptoms to the doctor; and he'll call in the prescription.
You realize that this commentary didn't originate with Verizon, right? And that Verizon is specifically saying they're not steering people away from iPhone(which is a popular seller and money-maker for them ). The entire article is someone's linkbait speculation that Verizon might not want to sell iPhones, nothing more.
Ignoring the cherry-picking from my original post, device integration is not a consideration for most cases. Certainly not for the vast majority of oss projects that are software only.
Aside from your mischaracterization of my statements, please explain how all OSS would up and disappear (or otherwise be "dead") in five years if people stopped licensing new software under the GPL? How do you explain the continued success of projects under more permissive licenses such as mit, apache, and bsd?
I don't understand how you logically conclude that free software would die when all evidence shows that it thrives under non-GPL licensing.
Tfs: US Journalists Targeted By Pentagon Propaganda Contractors
Tfa: says that they appear to have been targeted by a misinformation campaign. TFA makes no mention of a connection between the actions and propaganda contractors.
Might be that they are connected - but nowhere is there proof or even a suggestion of proof for the statement.
A lot of newer projects are more concerned with getting their source adopted and in use than with making sure users contribute back. And the best way to get better adoption is to use a license that doesn't scare people (and lawyers).
Licenses which aren't the GPL scare me, because I always assume that eventually the critical people will end up working for some company that manages a closed fork.
That's definitely possible, yet this does not give those core contributors - or their new corporate overlords - the means to remove the original source from circulation. It can still be picked up by others and improved upon.
And if the project is so reliant on those specific individuals that this isn't realistic, I would argue it's not safe to rely on such a project to begin with due to the unpredictable nature of busses.
In a truck I used to have, I had wired up my reverse lights to an external switch. When an asshat tailgated, I'd flip them on and watch the ensuing mayhem.
I probably wouldn't do that now - in retrospect the asshats' often unpredictable reactions created a hazard worse than tailgating - but *damn* was it funny to watch them at the time.
Slashdot Mirror
When it's something I work really intensely, I often come up with the best solutions indirectly in a dream. That is, I'll dream of a solution - usually it's not directly helpful, but upon waking it's easy to follow the impractical dream solution to its roots and find the real answer. Usually in a "oh that's so obvious, why didn't I see it sooner?!" kind of way.
Walking is another good time for me - unless I"m listening to an audiobook, which seems to suppress the necessary 'mind wandering'.
resources are finite. To give to one you often have to take from the other.
Not when you have multiple supplies for those resources. So one investor chooses to invest in social media - that opens the door for another investor to stake a claim on the Next Big Technology Innovation. There is a diverse group of investors - and they invest in diverse things. While at the individual level there is opportunity cost, in aggregate there's no reason to think it would work out that way (and the professor interviewed in the article gives no reason or evidence to support that it might).
Posting on failbook that you're taking a shit is NOT keeping in touch with people. Mailing them when you have something important to share IS.
Because hyperbole alone is a fantastic way to make a point.
. We developed those relationships, those friendships, because they share the same passion for development that we do
You have no idea how rare that is.
In a place where programming is a ticket out of poverty, and the larger consulting firms literally snatch up tens of thousands of graduates who are in it solely for the money - graduates who do not have the aptitude to be good programmers - skilled, capable programmers are true diamonds in the rough.
The situation now in India is the same but a vastly higher quantity of incapable programmers is entering the workforce every year. The ratio of skilled to clueless is the same as anywhere - but with the higher quantities it's very rare to find the skilled.
This is no slight against Indian people -- we saw the same thing in the US but on a much lesser scale in the late 90s and early 00s That's when everyone thought it was a way to get rich - hop on board the dot-com bandwagon. The market was flooded with incapable wannabe programmers and it took years for them to wash out (some never did).
If this hasn't been your experience, count yourself very lucky.
Maybe those same people who BUY AND PAY FOR LAWS managed, over the course of a few decades, to get the laws shifted so that the tax burden now falls on working people instead of the wealthy,
Except that the taxes are largely paid by the "wealthy". Yes, they pay less of a percentage of their income, but they pay many times mroe in actual dollars. 10% of the country pays 95% (or 99% can't remember) of all tax dollars.
So no, the "wealthy" are still paying the lion's share of the taxes. And they're still largely the ones paying for the armed ships, planes, troops, etc.
Yes, you feel your higher percentage rate more because it has more of an effect on your day to day spending/living -- but don't let that fool you into thinking that the "rich" aren't paying.
Another advantage you have by not using any of the numerous mobile ad frameworks/apis is that you're not giving away your users' usage patterns and other unknown data. Good choice!
That's something that has always irritated me about the ad-sponsored apps: the app developers (usually) have no concept of how that data is getting used -- and they seem to be ignorant of the fact that multiple app developers using the same framework means that the providers get to build quite a profile. All tied to a specific user by phone number or email address.
It's simple.
People are literally paid to watch sites such as this, refreshing non-stop, and to pounce on new articles the *instant* they show up. Probably some college student making $10 per post or something.
Sure; but my point is that the FCC introduced regulations requiring US carriers to support retaining the number in 2004.
This. How about mandating that the customer get to keep his/her number when switching networks? *Boggle*
Actually, you can. Since ~2004 or so.
Would this be "bitchingate" or "moaningate" ?
Damn you auto-correct. s/popular/pop-up
Because for most people, it would be more info that they'd need to ignore. In addition if you're trying to close or exit a document, it means that you're trying to finish a task- not begin a new one like evaluating a document difference.
There is a place for that functionality, but it is something that the user should initiate. Otherwise it just gets scanned and ignored like any other popular. (Literally. Almost nobody reads a popular message or promotion if they didn't ask for it. They typically scan the response options for the one most likely to let them continue with what they want to do.)
On the other hand, how long should a company support someone who made a one-time purchase of software two-years ago, with the understanding that it was being bought as-is?
It's all well and good to say "get over it", but that doesn't address the question.
You're reading too many talking points.
The top 1% of earners pay more in tax dollars than the combined bottom 90% of earners.
So what's your definition of "fair share"?
Actually rim isn't pushing html5, except for developers who want to have apps compatible with new and old platforms.
Otherwise they're heavily pushing Cascades and their native API (c/c++ on a positive compliant platform )
Wow. You must... like... really care... and shit.
You listed a bunch of symptoms that people can certainly diagnose with access to the right tests.
What most people can't do is understand and diagnose the underlying conditions that maycause these symptoms.
That seems to vary by practice. My wife has a similar history of sinus infections, and it's reached the point where she can call into the doctor's office andexplain her symptoms to the doctor; and he'll call in the prescription.
Dogs also have a "language" - different types and tones of bark (danger, fear, play), many other combinations of body language and sound.
(Said as an owner of three dogsand one retarded cat, and companion/housemate to a cat of normal feline intellect )
You realize that this commentary didn't originate with Verizon, right? And that Verizon is specifically saying they're not steering people away from iPhone(which is a popular seller and money-maker for them ). The entire article is someone's linkbait speculation that Verizon might not want to sell iPhones, nothing more.
Well now, let's think this through logically for a moment....
Ignoring the cherry-picking from my original post, device integration is not a consideration for most cases. Certainly not for the vast majority of oss projects that are software only.
Aside from your mischaracterization of my statements, please explain how all OSS would up and disappear (or otherwise be "dead") in five years if people stopped licensing new software under the GPL? How do you explain the continued success of projects under more permissive licenses such as mit, apache, and bsd?
I don't understand how you logically conclude that free software would die when all evidence shows that it thrives under non-GPL licensing.
Tfs: US Journalists Targeted By Pentagon Propaganda Contractors
Tfa: says that they appear to have been targeted by a misinformation campaign. TFA makes no mention of a connection between the actions and propaganda contractors.
Might be that they are connected - but nowhere is there proof or even a suggestion of proof for the statement.
WTF slashdot...
A lot of newer projects are more concerned with getting their source adopted and in use than with making sure users contribute back. And the best way to get better adoption is to use a license that doesn't scare people (and lawyers).
Licenses which aren't the GPL scare me, because I always assume that eventually the critical people will end up working for some company that manages a closed fork.
That's definitely possible, yet this does not give those core contributors - or their new corporate overlords - the means to remove the original source from circulation. It can still be picked up by others and improved upon.
And if the project is so reliant on those specific individuals that this isn't realistic, I would argue it's not safe to rely on such a project to begin with due to the unpredictable nature of busses.
In a truck I used to have, I had wired up my reverse lights to an external switch. When an asshat tailgated, I'd flip them on and watch the ensuing mayhem.
I probably wouldn't do that now - in retrospect the asshats' often unpredictable reactions created a hazard worse than tailgating - but *damn* was it funny to watch them at the time.