Not pointless. It just enforces the fact that AS A WHOLE, the internet is better off without congress trying to play with it. In order to get any special interest law passed, first they have to get a majority to repeal this law, which could likely fail because then all sorts of other special interests may try to get stupid stuff passed.
I guess I wouldn't know about that. I haven't worked full time in 5 years, and I haven't worked anywhere that if I took a full time position that I would start with less than 4 weeks off. And I haven't had less than 4 weeks in the past 15 years.
I've found they during hiring negotiations that companies are more willing to give an extra 2 weeks off than another 4% in pay. Granted, it usually comes up because my salary is out of their price range, and I drop my asking salary 2% for every week they can offer. I'd be willing to even take up to 8 weeks if anyone would offer it, but most I've been offered is 5 +1 the last week of the year.
I am hopeful that it will take a lot less time this time around. It seems the big players (google, yahoo, Facebook, and even MS itself) are doing what they can to move stuff forward.
We had some push back when we wanted to drop support for IE 7, however, when we explained to the client that our usage for IE 7 was 7% and dropping fast they said that is what they use themselves. Then I told them that they needed to upgrade, and they came back with the standard crsp about company policy blah blah. I then asked what they were going to do in a couple months because google/YouTube, yahoo and Facebook are all dropping support in a month, and they said they would get back to me but we still needed to support it. A week later, I got notified that the company was rolling out win 7 across the board. Apparently the higher ups NEED to watch their kitty videos on YouTube trumps all. Who knew?
It's miserable pukes like you that are clueless and responsible for the USA's financial woes. A happy, well rested employee is more productive and more creative than a miserable, tired, and heartened employee. An extra week of vacation really only translates out to a 2% bonus, and helps keep them refreshed and will keep them more productive, happy, and less likely to burn out.
I kinda did the same thing, although I didn't get laid off. I got into a disagreement with the president of my then current company, and he asked me if I still wanted to work there. I stuttered for a second, and I said no. He was floored, since I had worked there for 15+ years, was the head of R&D and was fairly indispensable at the time (Noone is indispensable, but they were definitely hurting for a couple years after I left). I took some serious time off, and when I started actually looking for something to do, I found being a consultant changed a lot of things for me. No longer were people looking for the 20-somethings that would work 80-hours, they actually wanted someone who knew what they were doing, and would do it for them quickly (because all of a sudden now they have to pay by the hour). I can honestly say, I never want to go back. My clients are happy, and I'm happy. I'm no longer bitching about having to work 60-100 hour work weeks because my boss is unreasonable and I'm not getting paid for it. Now I actually DO get paid for it, and NO client of mine wants me to work over 40 hours a week because they don't want to pay me 150% of my normal rate. They are more than happy to delay whatever it was that they needed another week to save themselves a few bucks.
Oh, and I should also note for all you city planning bastards out there, that it was near a place I regularly spent thousands of dollars per year. After that ticket, I have never been back, so the city lost more in lost sales tax alone than they made on their bogus ticket the first year, and now they continue to lose it many times over.
Last I checked, the actual formula for determining the yellow light time gave an absolute minimum number of seconds, and a recommended number range. I only know this because I got a red light ticket. It showed everything in video with numbers showing when the light turned yellow, where I was at the time, and where I was when it turned red, as well as the length of the yellow. I looked this up because I felt it was unsafe and nearly impossible to stop safely at that intersection, and I was correct. They changed the yellow duration to 2.01 seconds, exactly.01 seconds longer than the absolute minimum number of seconds required by law, and even that was suspect because of the size of the intersection I believe it would have required a 2.25 second yellow, in which case I would not have been fined. I also noted that if I paid the ticket by mail it didn't go on my record, but if I contested it, then it would be considered a moving violation and an insanely higher fee.
And I also realized that even if I won, I would have paid over 20x the cost of the ticket (and probably much more), so I just paid it and wrote a nasty note on the comment section of my check.
Not sure what you think the problem with that is actually. Yes, loading jquery a second time is bad and should be removed. It appears that caption.js relies upon mootools, and I'm not sure what core.js is.
The REAL problem is HTML5/CSS3 committees not getting off their collective asses and finalizing the spec. Then waiting for the browsers to all actually implement it, and then finally waiting for people to upgrade to those browsers. The last part being the most important as many refuse to upgrade even to browsers that (fully) support older standards.
This causes the need for all these so called frameworks that fill in all the missing pieces and give a standard API for web developers to use. If HTML5/CSS3 were complete, all the browsers implement them, and people upgraded to them, then the vast majority of what these frameworks do is no longer needed. Plug ins like caption.js, and jquery.bxSlider.js would just use the native HTML5/CSS3 instead. I've coded enough javascript that breaks in interesting ways in different browsers that I don't even try anymore. I load jQuery and write to that API instead, and trust that either it works across all the browsers, or it will be fixed faster (and less wasted time on my part) than if I did it myself. Those few times where I catch something, I file a bug with the jQuery team and then see if I can fix it myself or come up with a workaround.
Hmm... My first system, I went from a 4.77Mhz to 6 to 8 to 16 in my original motherboard (last upgrade was after I bought the 386DX/16). My second system, I bought used from a friend that was a 386DX/16 - manual "turbo" to 20 or 25 (bought a used system). I quickly replaced that with a brand new system using a 486/33 (brand new system), replaced the CPU in that to a 486DX2/66, and replaced it again with a 486DX4/100 (after I bought a new Pentium system). Since then I don't believe I've changed the CPU more than twice in any motherboard, but I do it often enough. However, I almost always switch the motherboard out and keep the CPUs the same now unless there is a compelling reason, like a "significantly" better CPU upgrade that requires a new socket, or a new south bridge that has features I want. Where the definition of "significantly" varies by the additional cost of such an upgrade, the perceived improvement it would make, and the money I have sitting in the bank at the time. My typical upgrade cycle goes like this: 1)Motherboard A + CPU A 2)Motherboard A + CPU B 3)Motherboard B + CPU B & Motherboard A + CPU A 4)Go to step 1
Perhaps you are looking at it the wrong way. You can no longer keep your current functioning CPU and just replace the motherboard. I've switched the motherboard and kept the CPU a number of times.
I guess I'm part of that minority. I've done it both ways. I upgrade my CPU and put it into the same motherboard (for more cores, or faster speeds), and I've upgraded my motherboard (Better features like USB 3, more memory slots/faster memory, more high speed PCIe connections, e-Sata, more Sata ports, etc) while keeping my current CPU. My latest upgrade I did upgrade both at the same time, but that is because I wanted a newer chipset (X79 for USB 3, more PCIe lanes, 8 memory slots in quad channel config) and that required a different socket.
That said, I doubt it would kill me if they were paired. I would just upgrade less often, and when I relegate my old setup to my backup workstation, I wouldn't consider upgrading the processor to the latest one at dirt cheap prices as I would no longer be able to.
If someone could make a compelling argument as to why it should be moved to 64-bit, I'm sure they would. Visual Studio has no problem allowing users to write, compile, and debug 64-bit programs -- I do it every day. I don't think they are even close to requiring more than 4GB of memory for themselves, so making a 64-bit version of it or most of Microsoft's own applications is just not needed, and would cause more issues, work, and overhead for nearly no perceivable improvement.
Then again, I've never had to try and debug one of my programs that required more than 4GB of code or data, so maybe there is an issue somewhere than I am not aware of.
I'm legally required to go to school until a certain age.
Nope. You are not required to go to THAT school, and you aren't required to do go any school at all. You are allowed to stay at home and be home schooled as well.
Yes, the numbers given really are pretty pointless if you wanted to figure out what the average offer was, or offer range, or anything else fairly useful. He didn't supply nearly enough information to do that.
It could have been ~450k companies all bidding $1 on the same 88 engineers. Or 1 company that bid $2,999,912 on a single engineer, and $1 on 87 others. Or a bunch of different scenarios. The numbers really are only vaguely important to him because the assumption is that he's going to collect some number that is less than 15% of that $30m for the first week. Grats to you Matt on coming up with what appears to be a relatively new idea, and hope it pays off well for you and your team.
Quite simple really. Set up a local mirror of all the usenet groups.
Sell them the right to download news articles unmonitored and unlogged to their laptop/phone/tablet at approximately $2-$4 per 4.7GB at gigabit speeds while they browse your DVD selection.
If you can't figure out how "First auction had $30m in job offers on 88 engineers, second auction generated $80m in job offers on 150 engineers. There's a huge need for something better in this space..." is not the same as "So, these companies are really bidding an average of $350-$500k/yr for developers in these auctions?", perhaps then he should exclude you.
"First auction had $30m in job offers on 88 engineers" does not mean there were 88 job offers. You fail at simplistic algebra and/or reading English and/or converting English to algebra.
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't violate it because the future legislature has the right to repeal this law at anytime.
Not pointless. It just enforces the fact that AS A WHOLE, the internet is better off without congress trying to play with it. In order to get any special interest law passed, first they have to get a majority to repeal this law, which could likely fail because then all sorts of other special interests may try to get stupid stuff passed.
You mean like an edit button?
I guess I wouldn't know about that. I haven't worked full time in 5 years, and I haven't worked anywhere that if I took a full time position that I would start with less than 4 weeks off. And I haven't had less than 4 weeks in the past 15 years.
I've found they during hiring negotiations that companies are more willing to give an extra 2 weeks off than another 4% in pay. Granted, it usually comes up because my salary is out of their price range, and I drop my asking salary 2% for every week they can offer. I'd be willing to even take up to 8 weeks if anyone would offer it, but most I've been offered is 5 +1 the last week of the year.
I am hopeful that it will take a lot less time this time around. It seems the big players (google, yahoo, Facebook, and even MS itself) are doing what they can to move stuff forward.
We had some push back when we wanted to drop support for IE 7, however, when we explained to the client that our usage for IE 7 was 7% and dropping fast they said that is what they use themselves. Then I told them that they needed to upgrade, and they came back with the standard crsp about company policy blah blah. I then asked what they were going to do in a couple months because google/YouTube, yahoo and Facebook are all dropping support in a month, and they said they would get back to me but we still needed to support it. A week later, I got notified that the company was rolling out win 7 across the board. Apparently the higher ups NEED to watch their kitty videos on YouTube trumps all. Who knew?
And what's wrong with 5 weeks of vacation a year?
It's miserable pukes like you that are clueless and responsible for the USA's financial woes. A happy, well rested employee is more productive and more creative than a miserable, tired, and heartened employee. An extra week of vacation really only translates out to a 2% bonus, and helps keep them refreshed and will keep them more productive, happy, and less likely to burn out.
I kinda did the same thing, although I didn't get laid off. I got into a disagreement with the president of my then current company, and he asked me if I still wanted to work there. I stuttered for a second, and I said no. He was floored, since I had worked there for 15+ years, was the head of R&D and was fairly indispensable at the time (Noone is indispensable, but they were definitely hurting for a couple years after I left). I took some serious time off, and when I started actually looking for something to do, I found being a consultant changed a lot of things for me. No longer were people looking for the 20-somethings that would work 80-hours, they actually wanted someone who knew what they were doing, and would do it for them quickly (because all of a sudden now they have to pay by the hour). I can honestly say, I never want to go back. My clients are happy, and I'm happy. I'm no longer bitching about having to work 60-100 hour work weeks because my boss is unreasonable and I'm not getting paid for it. Now I actually DO get paid for it, and NO client of mine wants me to work over 40 hours a week because they don't want to pay me 150% of my normal rate. They are more than happy to delay whatever it was that they needed another week to save themselves a few bucks.
I need to practice my singing.
Oh, and I should also note for all you city planning bastards out there, that it was near a place I regularly spent thousands of dollars per year. After that ticket, I have never been back, so the city lost more in lost sales tax alone than they made on their bogus ticket the first year, and now they continue to lose it many times over.
Last I checked, the actual formula for determining the yellow light time gave an absolute minimum number of seconds, and a recommended number range. I only know this because I got a red light ticket. It showed everything in video with numbers showing when the light turned yellow, where I was at the time, and where I was when it turned red, as well as the length of the yellow. I looked this up because I felt it was unsafe and nearly impossible to stop safely at that intersection, and I was correct. They changed the yellow duration to 2.01 seconds, exactly .01 seconds longer than the absolute minimum number of seconds required by law, and even that was suspect because of the size of the intersection I believe it would have required a 2.25 second yellow, in which case I would not have been fined. I also noted that if I paid the ticket by mail it didn't go on my record, but if I contested it, then it would be considered a moving violation and an insanely higher fee.
And I also realized that even if I won, I would have paid over 20x the cost of the ticket (and probably much more), so I just paid it and wrote a nasty note on the comment section of my check.
Not sure what you think the problem with that is actually. Yes, loading jquery a second time is bad and should be removed. It appears that caption.js relies upon mootools, and I'm not sure what core.js is.
The REAL problem is HTML5/CSS3 committees not getting off their collective asses and finalizing the spec. Then waiting for the browsers to all actually implement it, and then finally waiting for people to upgrade to those browsers. The last part being the most important as many refuse to upgrade even to browsers that (fully) support older standards.
This causes the need for all these so called frameworks that fill in all the missing pieces and give a standard API for web developers to use. If HTML5/CSS3 were complete, all the browsers implement them, and people upgraded to them, then the vast majority of what these frameworks do is no longer needed. Plug ins like caption.js, and jquery.bxSlider.js would just use the native HTML5/CSS3 instead. I've coded enough javascript that breaks in interesting ways in different browsers that I don't even try anymore. I load jQuery and write to that API instead, and trust that either it works across all the browsers, or it will be fixed faster (and less wasted time on my part) than if I did it myself. Those few times where I catch something, I file a bug with the jQuery team and then see if I can fix it myself or come up with a workaround.
Hmm...
My first system, I went from a 4.77Mhz to 6 to 8 to 16 in my original motherboard (last upgrade was after I bought the 386DX/16).
My second system, I bought used from a friend that was a 386DX/16 - manual "turbo" to 20 or 25 (bought a used system).
I quickly replaced that with a brand new system using a 486/33 (brand new system), replaced the CPU in that to a 486DX2/66, and replaced it again with a 486DX4/100 (after I bought a new Pentium system).
Since then I don't believe I've changed the CPU more than twice in any motherboard, but I do it often enough. However, I almost always switch the motherboard out and keep the CPUs the same now unless there is a compelling reason, like a "significantly" better CPU upgrade that requires a new socket, or a new south bridge that has features I want. Where the definition of "significantly" varies by the additional cost of such an upgrade, the perceived improvement it would make, and the money I have sitting in the bank at the time.
My typical upgrade cycle goes like this:
1)Motherboard A + CPU A
2)Motherboard A + CPU B
3)Motherboard B + CPU B & Motherboard A + CPU A
4)Go to step 1
You've never replaced a motherboard and kept the CPU either?
Perhaps you are looking at it the wrong way. You can no longer keep your current functioning CPU and just replace the motherboard. I've switched the motherboard and kept the CPU a number of times.
Now that the main Intel mobo maker is well, intel
I don't think intel motherboards outsell evga, asus, gigabyte or a number of other manufacturers.
I guess I'm part of that minority. I've done it both ways. I upgrade my CPU and put it into the same motherboard (for more cores, or faster speeds), and I've upgraded my motherboard (Better features like USB 3, more memory slots/faster memory, more high speed PCIe connections, e-Sata, more Sata ports, etc) while keeping my current CPU. My latest upgrade I did upgrade both at the same time, but that is because I wanted a newer chipset (X79 for USB 3, more PCIe lanes, 8 memory slots in quad channel config) and that required a different socket.
That said, I doubt it would kill me if they were paired. I would just upgrade less often, and when I relegate my old setup to my backup workstation, I wouldn't consider upgrading the processor to the latest one at dirt cheap prices as I would no longer be able to.
If someone could make a compelling argument as to why it should be moved to 64-bit, I'm sure they would. Visual Studio has no problem allowing users to write, compile, and debug 64-bit programs -- I do it every day. I don't think they are even close to requiring more than 4GB of memory for themselves, so making a 64-bit version of it or most of Microsoft's own applications is just not needed, and would cause more issues, work, and overhead for nearly no perceivable improvement.
Then again, I've never had to try and debug one of my programs that required more than 4GB of code or data, so maybe there is an issue somewhere than I am not aware of.
Another clueless AC.
I'm legally required to go to school until a certain age.
Nope. You are not required to go to THAT school, and you aren't required to do go any school at all. You are allowed to stay at home and be home schooled as well.
For the record, the shut down button is now in the Settings panel for some unknown reason.
For the record, hit control-alt-delete, just like you were going to switch to a new user, launch task manager, or lock the computer.
Heh, and typing fail, I dropped a digit. Oh well. What's 27m between friends.
Yes, the numbers given really are pretty pointless if you wanted to figure out what the average offer was, or offer range, or anything else fairly useful. He didn't supply nearly enough information to do that.
It could have been ~450k companies all bidding $1 on the same 88 engineers. Or 1 company that bid $2,999,912 on a single engineer, and $1 on 87 others. Or a bunch of different scenarios. The numbers really are only vaguely important to him because the assumption is that he's going to collect some number that is less than 15% of that $30m for the first week. Grats to you Matt on coming up with what appears to be a relatively new idea, and hope it pays off well for you and your team.
Quite simple really. Set up a local mirror of all the usenet groups.
Sell them the right to download news articles unmonitored and unlogged to their laptop/phone/tablet at approximately $2-$4 per 4.7GB at gigabit speeds while they browse your DVD selection.
Just a thought...
...
If you can't figure out how "First auction had $30m in job offers on 88 engineers, second auction generated $80m in job offers on 150 engineers. There's a huge need for something better in this space..." is not the same as "So, these companies are really bidding an average of $350-$500k/yr for developers in these auctions?", perhaps then he should exclude you.
"First auction had $30m in job offers on 88 engineers" does not mean there were 88 job offers. You fail at simplistic algebra and/or reading English and/or converting English to algebra.
Just sayin...
Obviously, there is more than 1 offer per engineer per auction. Wasn't that hard to figure out.