Yeah, but how many people on the street do you encounter that talk about making wood furniture at home? While the hype is a bit much, 3D printers are mostly exciting to the same types of people who in the past would have a woodshop in their garage or similar hobby setup.
Things get even murkier when talking about 'software engineers' since that can range anywhere from 'title I made up' through 'goes through 75+% of the same coursework as an EE but has no path to certification'
I have found that when companies start 'discovering' things 10 years later, it is because the earlier 'paper only' work would not actually work at the time and probably should never have been granted in the first place. You have plenty of 'choice', but sitting and waiting for someone to actually do the work and make a success out of something then springing your patents on them and trying to cash in... yeah.. you are not likely to get much sympathy for your forced hand.
If you are someone who represents patent holders as you claim, then you are also aware that most patent suits never make it to court because, while the cost of the suit is high, the cost of defense is significantly higher. Cases are only 'hard to win' when the defendant can actually defend themselves or when the patent (usually software) is shakey enough that it does not get pushed through quickly.
The big fish in tech would already like to see reform, the problem is other industries. Biotech has a much better lobby, is linked to a less visible but larger industry, and has come out in strong opposition to any changes that might make the system a bit saner. So the patent trolls can pick on tech all they like and not fear policies changing.
The legal protection is not based off job title. As a title "engineer" has no concrete meaning, esp when it comes to software. While electrical engineers (who might be involved in tech projects) do indeed have legally special certification, 'software engineers' do not.
The question then becomes, is that the type of engineer the graph is displaying? If it is pulling from job descriptions or titles then 'engineer' is pretty meaningless other than being a fancy job description that nets you more cash. If instead it is pulling from, say, certified electrical engineers, then the higher wages make sense.
Going one step further, the problem is not even the people who hire the lawyers, but the legislators who crafted law enforcement out of the laws. People would not have to hire mercenaries if regulators and prosecutors were actually doing their jobs, but political expediency meant LEO does not have to do any of that pesky regulation enforcement against companies and keeps that cozy relationship between business and politics comfortable.
Which is why it should be a criminal or regulatory investigation instead. However, because of the way our legal system is put together, this kind of DIY justice is pretty much the only option. People resort to class action lawsuits because prosecutors and law enforcement have written themselves out of responsibility and delegated enforcement of such laws to the consumer. Many laws and regulations are ONLY triggerable via class action lawsuit.
Though would it not be amusing if the FBI actually went after them? The departments already have animosity towards each other, though probably not enough to overcome the 'stick togetherness' of law enforcement against everyone else.
It is generally less that people are authoritarian, and more that they fear who might be voted in if they do not go for their least disliked candidate. People are pretty easy to scare with abstract 'if you vote for X, then Y wins!' culture war stuff, so much so that it takes precedent over other more real concerns.
Well, it is not that they lack the long term view, it is that their priorities put a heavier weight on the short term consequences since they are the ones being asked to bare it. Long term views are great when one is reaping the rewards or at least are not personally impacted all that much, but 'other people will be richer later' is not that big of a 'plus' for people who are becoming poorer in the now.
It is also worth noting that the 'new jobs opening up' tend to be in smaller numbers than the jobs closing down. So out of a displaced population, a few people will go on to do better, but the majority will have a lower quality of life even after things settle down. So they see the long term view, but it does not benefit them, and the people who it does benefit tend to have a bit of a blind spot in seeing outside their own class.
Intelligence probably will not be all that general. All industry needs are idiot-savant AIs, really good at some narrow domain and terrible at everything else.
Much of that 'interest' comes from TBills, which are based on government debt. In many ways investments are government subsidized, so you take away that debt and the bottom falls out of the market.
On the other hand, in each major wave of such innovation what we have generally seen is an increase in mean income but a decrease in median. So each jump creates a small number of well paying jobs and a large number of jobs that pay worse than the displaced positions did. Even within your example, the agricultural revolution was indeed a boon for society on the whole, but the people working the actual agricultural jobs had it worse than when they were hunter gatherers.
And while this sounds great if one pictures themselves being on the winning side of that equation, even when one is not, that increase in misery has a way of translating into things like higher crime rates and decay.
I am a bit confused here. Are they installing wifi infrastructure linking back to their own network, or at they depending on the consumer to piggy back on random people's base stations?
I have a hard time picturing wi-fi being all that good for calls since all a cell phone network is, really, is a specialized wi-fi network designed from the ground up to deal with the cell phone use-case. So if they are just spreading base stations around their coverage area then all they are really doing is setting up cheap crappy cell towers, and if they are piggy backing then yeah, it is easy to offer a low price when someone else is picking up the tab, which I can not imagine will last long.
Nicer? When I look at that, my first assumption is that there were additional lines after the y loop that somehow got erased. If I was reviewing this code, I would tell the developer to fix the indentation before checking it in, regardless of language.
I am always amazed at how many 'programmers' do not want to get all that icky math, science, or engineering on them. Understanding what the computer is doing! Oh my *faint*
Key word: non-standard. Often in engineering, standard is better than the best solution.
Though personally I like zero indexing since it makes more sense, I tend to be kinda skeptical of programmers who prefer 1 indexing since it makes me suspect they do not think much about what the computer is actually doing.
That bit confused me too. I do not recall the motivation behind these efforts having anything to do with 'more apps' in the first place, and calling for such an outcome seems kinda misguided.
Coding involves learning to break down complicated tasks into simple steps and then explaining those steps to an idiot (computer). That sounds like something that is kinda useful in the rest of someone's life, even if they never write one again.
And within that, there is usually some weak link that can be exploited. A pirate does not need full understanding of the code base, they just need to track down that one little 'make it run' signal and duplicate that. At some point the program has to ask something, either itself or an external authority, 'can I run?', and there is always a way to say 'yes' otherwise, well, it would not work in the first place.
These 'tools' usually just harden a stage that a pirate is probably not going to be needing to deal with anyway.
Oh I agree there is a demand for them, but I question how well they actually fill the need. I have used several, both in house and commercial, including ones that required special hardware to run, and they all got cracked. The only time they helped even a little was for low value products that were not worth the pirate's time.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but how many people on the street do you encounter that talk about making wood furniture at home? While the hype is a bit much, 3D printers are mostly exciting to the same types of people who in the past would have a woodshop in their garage or similar hobby setup.
Things get even murkier when talking about 'software engineers' since that can range anywhere from 'title I made up' through 'goes through 75+% of the same coursework as an EE but has no path to certification'
I have found that when companies start 'discovering' things 10 years later, it is because the earlier 'paper only' work would not actually work at the time and probably should never have been granted in the first place. You have plenty of 'choice', but sitting and waiting for someone to actually do the work and make a success out of something then springing your patents on them and trying to cash in... yeah.. you are not likely to get much sympathy for your forced hand.
If you are someone who represents patent holders as you claim, then you are also aware that most patent suits never make it to court because, while the cost of the suit is high, the cost of defense is significantly higher. Cases are only 'hard to win' when the defendant can actually defend themselves or when the patent (usually software) is shakey enough that it does not get pushed through quickly.
The big fish in tech would already like to see reform, the problem is other industries. Biotech has a much better lobby, is linked to a less visible but larger industry, and has come out in strong opposition to any changes that might make the system a bit saner. So the patent trolls can pick on tech all they like and not fear policies changing.
The legal protection is not based off job title. As a title "engineer" has no concrete meaning, esp when it comes to software. While electrical engineers (who might be involved in tech projects) do indeed have legally special certification, 'software engineers' do not.
The question then becomes, is that the type of engineer the graph is displaying? If it is pulling from job descriptions or titles then 'engineer' is pretty meaningless other than being a fancy job description that nets you more cash. If instead it is pulling from, say, certified electrical engineers, then the higher wages make sense.
Going one step further, the problem is not even the people who hire the lawyers, but the legislators who crafted law enforcement out of the laws. People would not have to hire mercenaries if regulators and prosecutors were actually doing their jobs, but political expediency meant LEO does not have to do any of that pesky regulation enforcement against companies and keeps that cozy relationship between business and politics comfortable.
Which is why it should be a criminal or regulatory investigation instead. However, because of the way our legal system is put together, this kind of DIY justice is pretty much the only option. People resort to class action lawsuits because prosecutors and law enforcement have written themselves out of responsibility and delegated enforcement of such laws to the consumer. Many laws and regulations are ONLY triggerable via class action lawsuit.
Though would it not be amusing if the FBI actually went after them? The departments already have animosity towards each other, though probably not enough to overcome the 'stick togetherness' of law enforcement against everyone else.
It is generally less that people are authoritarian, and more that they fear who might be voted in if they do not go for their least disliked candidate. People are pretty easy to scare with abstract 'if you vote for X, then Y wins!' culture war stuff, so much so that it takes precedent over other more real concerns.
And by 'suckers' you mean increasingly wealthy banking institutions who make buttloads of money off them?
Well, it is not that they lack the long term view, it is that their priorities put a heavier weight on the short term consequences since they are the ones being asked to bare it. Long term views are great when one is reaping the rewards or at least are not personally impacted all that much, but 'other people will be richer later' is not that big of a 'plus' for people who are becoming poorer in the now.
It is also worth noting that the 'new jobs opening up' tend to be in smaller numbers than the jobs closing down. So out of a displaced population, a few people will go on to do better, but the majority will have a lower quality of life even after things settle down. So they see the long term view, but it does not benefit them, and the people who it does benefit tend to have a bit of a blind spot in seeing outside their own class.
Intelligence probably will not be all that general. All industry needs are idiot-savant AIs, really good at some narrow domain and terrible at everything else.
Much of that 'interest' comes from TBills, which are based on government debt. In many ways investments are government subsidized, so you take away that debt and the bottom falls out of the market.
On the other hand, in each major wave of such innovation what we have generally seen is an increase in mean income but a decrease in median. So each jump creates a small number of well paying jobs and a large number of jobs that pay worse than the displaced positions did. Even within your example, the agricultural revolution was indeed a boon for society on the whole, but the people working the actual agricultural jobs had it worse than when they were hunter gatherers.
And while this sounds great if one pictures themselves being on the winning side of that equation, even when one is not, that increase in misery has a way of translating into things like higher crime rates and decay.
I am a bit confused here. Are they installing wifi infrastructure linking back to their own network, or at they depending on the consumer to piggy back on random people's base stations?
I have a hard time picturing wi-fi being all that good for calls since all a cell phone network is, really, is a specialized wi-fi network designed from the ground up to deal with the cell phone use-case. So if they are just spreading base stations around their coverage area then all they are really doing is setting up cheap crappy cell towers, and if they are piggy backing then yeah, it is easy to offer a low price when someone else is picking up the tab, which I can not imagine will last long.
Nicer? When I look at that, my first assumption is that there were additional lines after the y loop that somehow got erased. If I was reviewing this code, I would tell the developer to fix the indentation before checking it in, regardless of language.
I am always amazed at how many 'programmers' do not want to get all that icky math, science, or engineering on them. Understanding what the computer is doing! Oh my *faint*
Key word: non-standard. Often in engineering, standard is better than the best solution.
Though personally I like zero indexing since it makes more sense, I tend to be kinda skeptical of programmers who prefer 1 indexing since it makes me suspect they do not think much about what the computer is actually doing.
Video existed yes, but it did not really occupy the same place as it did after youtube became mainstream.
That bit confused me too. I do not recall the motivation behind these efforts having anything to do with 'more apps' in the first place, and calling for such an outcome seems kinda misguided.
Coding involves learning to break down complicated tasks into simple steps and then explaining those steps to an idiot (computer). That sounds like something that is kinda useful in the rest of someone's life, even if they never write one again.
And within that, there is usually some weak link that can be exploited. A pirate does not need full understanding of the code base, they just need to track down that one little 'make it run' signal and duplicate that. At some point the program has to ask something, either itself or an external authority, 'can I run?', and there is always a way to say 'yes' otherwise, well, it would not work in the first place.
These 'tools' usually just harden a stage that a pirate is probably not going to be needing to deal with anyway.
Oh I agree there is a demand for them, but I question how well they actually fill the need. I have used several, both in house and commercial, including ones that required special hardware to run, and they all got cracked. The only time they helped even a little was for low value products that were not worth the pirate's time.