I work about the same amount regardless. If someone else on the team screws up then that impacts the overall productivity of team, which may affect my employer's bottom line, but it doesn't result in any more work on my part. Given that, I'd rather have the nice person. My employer, however, would almost surely rather have the competent asshole.
Lots of things are worth a quarter percent of world GDP. Like the manifold ways in which we could improve life on earth, or do other "pure science" type research. The question is what gives the most bang for our collective buck. By most estimates manned space exploration isn't the right answer.
I use a Mac at work. Our product deploys to Tomcat and Apache on Solaris. My point was that, in general, even support for Linux interop is far from a "given" in the "real world". To the extent that a university mirrors this inconsistent support it more closely resembles "life after university".
As a side note, I also find it pretty ludicrous that someone would choose a university based on its Linux support.
I've never understood why the slashdot crowd has such a collective hardon for manned space flight. Are there not enough other "big problems" to solve down here on the planet?
Way to miss the point. How many corporations (not named "IBM") run Linux on their employees' desktop machines and company laptops? Or allow their employees some "choice" as to what desktop OS they can choose to run?
I see no reason for a university IT shop to support interop with OSs, like Linux, that occupy only a small percentage of the desktop/laptop market share, given that such support will necessarily increase cost and complexity.
I do agree that CS/EE/etc. departments are remiss if they don't provide their students with some exposure to Linux and/or another unix-like OS. But that does not imply that the University-wide IT infrastructure need support Linux clients.
Your daughter can consider her university's Mac/Windows-centric policy as simply part of her preparation for the "real world" in which application developers and IT departments favor Mac/Windows and largely ignore Linux.
Article shows that performance is roughly equivalent beween the Q9550 and Phenom 965, with the AMD part enjoying a slight advantage if you look at all the benchmarks together. This while costing $30 more and consuming more power.
Would be interesting to see a comparison of the i7 920 with the Phenom. I'm guessing the 920 would outperform, which is what you'd expect since you're paying $30 more.
I can only speak for myself, but I recall a friend of mine fresh out of college wore a business suit to a developer interview, and basically got laughed at. Not in a mean way, granted, but still. Honestly, from my point of view, if "not wearing a suit" is going to be counted as a black mark against me then that's probably not a job I want to begin with. My typical "outfit" is khaki pants and a collared long-sleeve dress shirt. No tie. Casual-ish brown leather shoes.
Disagree on #7, depending on the job you're interviewing for. Wear something appropriate for the position you're seeking. I don't expect people coming to interview for a software developer position to wear a suit and tie. I do expect them not to wear shorts or a t-shirt. Khakis and a polo is fine with me.
1. What's the dress code? (Usually you can just infer this by looking at the employees who interview you.)
2. How many hours do people usually work in a normal week? (This can be dangerous in that it can communicate to an employer that you're "worried" about having to work "too much", but I always feel like I have to ask it anyway.)
3. Same question as above, but for "crunch time" situations (e.g. just before a release, etc.)?
4. How do you assess employee performance? (I don't always ask this since it's typically not a deal breaker, but it's still good to know. Some places have review processes that are pretty crappy.)
Apple's policy keeps details of the upcoming products out of the popular press while simultaneously allowing the blogger / technophile communities to obsess about every rumor and alleged detail that does leak out. So it whets the appetite of the hardcore fans while still allowing Apple to "surprise" Joe Consumer (who doesn't read macrumors et. al.) when it comes out with something "new".
Assuming what Linus said is true, about Alan blaming user land code for problems he was responsible for, then Alan was clearly in the wrong. However, Linus is wrong to have taken him to task in such a public forum. If he had any sense, he'd have done it privately, and Alan Cox would probably still be the maintainer. There's more to managing people than simply "being right".
Hence why I recommended C++ instead of Java. I'd suggest some further study on how C++ actually implements its OO constructs. You could certainly start someone off with C to get a (somewhat) more detailed perspective on what's going on behind the scenes, but then you (mostly) lose out on the ability to teach OO concepts. For that matter, C itself is also an abstraction. You could just go with assembly. But then, assembly is also an abstraction. Maybe they should hand-assemble op codes? But what does an operation really "do"? Perhaps they should begin with logic gates and circuits.
In my opinion you should start ingraining the OO paradigm as soon as possible. I would say Java for its relative simplicity, but Java hides a lot of the nitty gritty details that you get exposed to when dealing with a language like C or C++. So then C++ might be a happy medium. You get exposed to all the object-oriented concepts, but are also forced to learn about memory management, linking, etc. Plus, as a little bonus, its widely used in industry. I think this can be appealing to new programmers in a way that learning a "educational" language isn't. I want to learn something people are actually using. Note that I'm not suggesting C++ is the easiest language to learn or master for new programmer. However, actually doing so might be more rewarding, from a "concepts learned" perspective, compared to the alternatives.
There is no free lunch. When the NYT content was "free" online, it was in fact being subsidized by the Times' paying paper subscribers. And the Times' advertisers, which it had to charge more in order to generate the revenue needed to subsidize the online site. Or, if the online site was in fact funded by its own advertisements, then it was paid for by the users of whatever products were being advertised.
The "ad funded" web is just another opportunity for companies to inflate their ad budgets and pass that cost onto consumers.
Personally, I will welcome the day when individual net access gets a more sane pricing structure.
Well my point was that including a separate no-cost "app bundle" with your OS isn't a particularly ruthless business practice. And I feel like that in an ideal world it should placate most of the people complaining about MS unfairly using its OS as a platform to push its other apps. In the scenario I described its more like, "Here's your OS, lean and mean. And, oh yeah, here are some free MS apps you can install if you want them."
Though, I can see the wisdom of supplying a functional set of productivity applications as an add-on to your operating system. Call it "Windows Productivity Pack" or something, and ship it in the same box as the OS. People can then install the OS sans apps, then subsequently install only those apps they want.
I was sort of hoping Microsoft would stand up to the EU and refuse their ridiculous demands. Or, at the very least, take the alternate approach of just not bundling a browser at all, but adding some "wget" or "curl" like command that installers could use to pull down the browser of their choice.
I never knew that about Perl5 or Python. Now that I do, I've got to say that's one of the more stupid things I've heard recently. Defined by its C implementation...on what platform? Using what standard c library? Using what compiler? Essentially that means Python/Win32/VC may be a different "language" than Python/gclib/gcc in that it behaves differently due to some compiler or clib quirk.
Programming languages do not have source code, and thus cannot be "open source". Unless perhaps you're referring to languages whose specifications are updated by means of some community driven process, e.g. Sun's JCP. Interpreters, virtual machines and run-time environments do have source code and can be open source. They're just not the same thing as "the programming language" itself, which is essentially just a specification.
From the article, which is just one journalist's opinion:
while the Catholic Church grumbles about a decline in spiritual values it has not actually demanded this law, nor are there many votes to be picked up on a âCatholic Irelandâ(TM) ticket. Even the other usual suspects, the âmad mullahsâ(TM) of Islam, are notable by their absence from the debate. Put simply, the religious lobby is not behind the move to criminalise blasphemy.
Dawkins appears to have misunderstood the nature of the proposed legislation. The reintroduction of blasphemy as an offence isnâ(TM)t evidence of Ireland backsliding into traditional religious superstition â" in fact, it shows just how up-to-date Ireland is when it comes to contemporary conceits.
In fact, the new law is a very modern phenomenon. Rather than harking back to the days of God-fearing, or at least priest-fearing, Ireland, the blasphemy law has more in common with contemporary politically correct measures of social control.
It doesn't seem obvious to me from the article that he bought a gillion processors and is now disappointed with their performance. He just says that one of the unexpected barriers they've run into in their quest to continually upgrade their infrastructure performance is the fact that Intel & AMD's server CPUs don't live up to their marketing when it comes to Facebook's particular workload. Given that he also touts "testing" as a key to success in the very same article, I'm assuming they tested the performance of next-gen processors before buying a ton of them.
Slashdot Mirror
I work about the same amount regardless. If someone else on the team screws up then that impacts the overall productivity of team, which may affect my employer's bottom line, but it doesn't result in any more work on my part. Given that, I'd rather have the nice person. My employer, however, would almost surely rather have the competent asshole.
Lots of things are worth a quarter percent of world GDP. Like the manifold ways in which we could improve life on earth, or do other "pure science" type research. The question is what gives the most bang for our collective buck. By most estimates manned space exploration isn't the right answer.
I use a Mac at work. Our product deploys to Tomcat and Apache on Solaris. My point was that, in general, even support for Linux interop is far from a "given" in the "real world". To the extent that a university mirrors this inconsistent support it more closely resembles "life after university".
As a side note, I also find it pretty ludicrous that someone would choose a university based on its Linux support.
I've never understood why the slashdot crowd has such a collective hardon for manned space flight. Are there not enough other "big problems" to solve down here on the planet?
Way to miss the point. How many corporations (not named "IBM") run Linux on their employees' desktop machines and company laptops? Or allow their employees some "choice" as to what desktop OS they can choose to run?
I see no reason for a university IT shop to support interop with OSs, like Linux, that occupy only a small percentage of the desktop/laptop market share, given that such support will necessarily increase cost and complexity.
I do agree that CS/EE/etc. departments are remiss if they don't provide their students with some exposure to Linux and/or another unix-like OS. But that does not imply that the University-wide IT infrastructure need support Linux clients.
Your daughter can consider her university's Mac/Windows-centric policy as simply part of her preparation for the "real world" in which application developers and IT departments favor Mac/Windows and largely ignore Linux.
And nothing of value was lost.
Did it impact your speed or direction?
Article shows that performance is roughly equivalent beween the Q9550 and Phenom 965, with the AMD part enjoying a slight advantage if you look at all the benchmarks together. This while costing $30 more and consuming more power.
Would be interesting to see a comparison of the i7 920 with the Phenom. I'm guessing the 920 would outperform, which is what you'd expect since you're paying $30 more.
I can only speak for myself, but I recall a friend of mine fresh out of college wore a business suit to a developer interview, and basically got laughed at. Not in a mean way, granted, but still. Honestly, from my point of view, if "not wearing a suit" is going to be counted as a black mark against me then that's probably not a job I want to begin with. My typical "outfit" is khaki pants and a collared long-sleeve dress shirt. No tie. Casual-ish brown leather shoes.
Disagree on #7, depending on the job you're interviewing for. Wear something appropriate for the position you're seeking. I don't expect people coming to interview for a software developer position to wear a suit and tie. I do expect them not to wear shorts or a t-shirt. Khakis and a polo is fine with me.
1. What's the dress code? (Usually you can just infer this by looking at the employees who interview you.)
2. How many hours do people usually work in a normal week? (This can be dangerous in that it can communicate to an employer that you're "worried" about having to work "too much", but I always feel like I have to ask it anyway.)
3. Same question as above, but for "crunch time" situations (e.g. just before a release, etc.)?
4. How do you assess employee performance? (I don't always ask this since it's typically not a deal breaker, but it's still good to know. Some places have review processes that are pretty crappy.)
Apple's policy keeps details of the upcoming products out of the popular press while simultaneously allowing the blogger / technophile communities to obsess about every rumor and alleged detail that does leak out. So it whets the appetite of the hardcore fans while still allowing Apple to "surprise" Joe Consumer (who doesn't read macrumors et. al.) when it comes out with something "new".
Assuming what Linus said is true, about Alan blaming user land code for problems he was responsible for, then Alan was clearly in the wrong. However, Linus is wrong to have taken him to task in such a public forum. If he had any sense, he'd have done it privately, and Alan Cox would probably still be the maintainer. There's more to managing people than simply "being right".
Hence why I recommended C++ instead of Java. I'd suggest some further study on how C++ actually implements its OO constructs. You could certainly start someone off with C to get a (somewhat) more detailed perspective on what's going on behind the scenes, but then you (mostly) lose out on the ability to teach OO concepts. For that matter, C itself is also an abstraction. You could just go with assembly. But then, assembly is also an abstraction. Maybe they should hand-assemble op codes? But what does an operation really "do"? Perhaps they should begin with logic gates and circuits.
Or we can be reasonable. :)
In my opinion you should start ingraining the OO paradigm as soon as possible. I would say Java for its relative simplicity, but Java hides a lot of the nitty gritty details that you get exposed to when dealing with a language like C or C++. So then C++ might be a happy medium. You get exposed to all the object-oriented concepts, but are also forced to learn about memory management, linking, etc. Plus, as a little bonus, its widely used in industry. I think this can be appealing to new programmers in a way that learning a "educational" language isn't. I want to learn something people are actually using. Note that I'm not suggesting C++ is the easiest language to learn or master for new programmer. However, actually doing so might be more rewarding, from a "concepts learned" perspective, compared to the alternatives.
There is no free lunch. When the NYT content was "free" online, it was in fact being subsidized by the Times' paying paper subscribers. And the Times' advertisers, which it had to charge more in order to generate the revenue needed to subsidize the online site. Or, if the online site was in fact funded by its own advertisements, then it was paid for by the users of whatever products were being advertised.
The "ad funded" web is just another opportunity for companies to inflate their ad budgets and pass that cost onto consumers.
Personally, I will welcome the day when individual net access gets a more sane pricing structure.
Well my point was that including a separate no-cost "app bundle" with your OS isn't a particularly ruthless business practice. And I feel like that in an ideal world it should placate most of the people complaining about MS unfairly using its OS as a platform to push its other apps. In the scenario I described its more like, "Here's your OS, lean and mean. And, oh yeah, here are some free MS apps you can install if you want them."
Cosign.
Though, I can see the wisdom of supplying a functional set of productivity applications as an add-on to your operating system. Call it "Windows Productivity Pack" or something, and ship it in the same box as the OS. People can then install the OS sans apps, then subsequently install only those apps they want.
I was sort of hoping Microsoft would stand up to the EU and refuse their ridiculous demands. Or, at the very least, take the alternate approach of just not bundling a browser at all, but adding some "wget" or "curl" like command that installers could use to pull down the browser of their choice.
I never knew that about Perl5 or Python. Now that I do, I've got to say that's one of the more stupid things I've heard recently. Defined by its C implementation...on what platform? Using what standard c library? Using what compiler? Essentially that means Python/Win32/VC may be a different "language" than Python/gclib/gcc in that it behaves differently due to some compiler or clib quirk.
Madness!
Programming languages do not have source code, and thus cannot be "open source". Unless perhaps you're referring to languages whose specifications are updated by means of some community driven process, e.g. Sun's JCP. Interpreters, virtual machines and run-time environments do have source code and can be open source. They're just not the same thing as "the programming language" itself, which is essentially just a specification.
From the article, which is just one journalist's opinion:
Here here. I never have mod points when I need them.
It doesn't seem obvious to me from the article that he bought a gillion processors and is now disappointed with their performance. He just says that one of the unexpected barriers they've run into in their quest to continually upgrade their infrastructure performance is the fact that Intel & AMD's server CPUs don't live up to their marketing when it comes to Facebook's particular workload. Given that he also touts "testing" as a key to success in the very same article, I'm assuming they tested the performance of next-gen processors before buying a ton of them.