I have comcast, was down for 3 days before they got it restored, and my bill was current. And I pay more for my internet with comcast then I would would google fiber.
If this was comcast, I would have been on the phone for an hour only to be told I needed to call a different department that was now closed. If this is how google mistreats people, please SIGN ME UP!
I disagree with you both your assessment and the "studies" reaching conclusion.
The study proves (weakly) that users who binge watch a tv show can recall it for less time. That makes sense. However, I hate watching shows weekly. Those shows that aren't released a season at a time, I will DVR them for the season and only begin watching them when the season ends.
I mostly agree with what you've said. I've noticed that between those two groups of IT workers, only about 10% of them actually enjoy their field, and take an active role in learning new things. The active guys (I'm one of them, BTW) will likely be around forever.
I'm currently on a team (and all teams I've been on have pretty much been that way) that consists of mostly junior developers who knock out code quite honestly faster than I can in most cases. However, 2-3 times a day I get questions from these junior programmers on why their stuff doesn't work, or how to do something they don't know how to do. Occasionally, I catch something that is being committed or included in a discussion where the plan was to do something really stupid that's been known and solved for a decade or more.
So... While my actual coding output may be more average on the team, I also keep the other 7 junior level developers productivity up, and keep the company from some major financial issues (lawsuits, losing customers, etc) all while increasing the quality of the solutions we deliver. That means lowering our maintenance costs, QA costs, and usually happier clients when we deliver what we promised -- or delivering what the client actually *wants*, not what they actually asked for. I see this trend continuing as the millennials grow up. 80-90% will change careers or move up in the management, while the remaining 10-20% oversee people more junior than themselves.
Of course, sometimes I get bored and take a quick consulting job where they need something done quickly and done right the first time and are willing to pay me to do it. Could be they want a solid design that works, or sometimes it's using some ancient tech or software (ancient as in 10+ years old). Sometimes it's just for fun, sometimes to break the monotony, sometimes to work solo, and almost always for the money.
If this is not multi tasking, I don't know what is
Well, it's good you realize you don't know what multitasking is I suppose. That exact scenario in most cases could be done via task switching. Although, to be fair, phones today actually do real multitasking instead of task switching so the point is mostly moot.
At a rudimentary level (please, I'm not trying to describe the difference between real multitasking and pseudo multitasking here), multitasking is the ability for multiple programs to run at the same time, where task switching is when you switch from one program to another the prior one freezes until you switch back to it. Whether you can see both at the same time or not (side by side, or windowed) doesn't describe multitasking vs task switching. It's very possible to be using task switching, and see a window in the background that isn't updating/computing/working. For example, if you have a browser window and it is displaying a real time clock and you switch windows to edit email and the clock stops until you switch back, then that is task switching, and good enough for the vast majority of people. They aren't switching away from excel that takes 20 minutes to calculate to go do something else. By the time they switch away, it is already done doing what it needs to do, and could be frozen. Now this would cause a problem if it was playing music or a video in the background, which yes, there are some cases in which that would be nice or even necessary but that is pretty rare, and as I said, phones already do that today, so it doesn't really matter.
iPhones are multitasking, but you can switch them to be more like task switching by going into the control panel->General->Background App Refresh and turn it off. That will "freeze" most applications when you switch away from it instead of letting it continue to run in the background. While not true task switching, it has a similar effect, and increases battery life. Most applications, and most people don't notice the difference usually. iPhones also auto-enable this globally when in "Low power mode" (last 20% of your battery life I believe).
This is probably because you have no real business experience and/or no ability to see beyond your own circumstance.
You'd be very very wrong. Perhaps you need to look in the mirror.
Explain how to use CADD design software on a smartphone where the standard use case is TWO 24" or 27" monitors. Or explain how you perform accounting analysis using a spreadsheet with 8000000 rows and 15000 columns on a smartphone. Or how you model or design pretty much anything with a smartphone. Or how you do any graphical design on a smartphone. Or explain how a programmer can reliably program, debug and compile code on a smartphone. Anyone doing any real business outside sales does it on real computers and that's not going to change.
I'm not even going to argue with your examples. Many of these could easily be replaced (and some have already been replaced!), but these aren't representative of the most use cases of desktop today. They represent a very small fraction of them, and since I didn't say desktops were going extinct, just that many are being replaced with phones and tablets, there is no point in discussing it further.
In the real world most people who aren't sales need real computers with big monitors and keyboards and mice.
No they don't. Not by a very very very long shot. Most people don't really need big monitors, and most don't need a dedicated keyboard or even a mouse if they have a touchscreen for input. But, a phone with a docking station would work just as well for 98% of all computer users given the right software.
Remote desktop isn't the same thing. It's similar, but different. With remote desktop you need a network connection to do any work, and you need a server to actually do the work.
The operating systems running on cell phones are poorly suited to multitasking, and thus do not offer a particularly productive environment to work in when they are connected to a screen with a mouse and keyboard.
Most users don't really need multitasking AT ALL. They need exactly what mobile operating systems offer which is task switching, and they do that quite well. The keyboard/mouse has nothing to do with anything.
Startups are interesting to watch because they aren't already entrenched in a particular way of doing something, so often you can spot up coming trends based on what they do differently. Not always of course, but it is one indicator of many.
I didn't say desktops were going away completely. I said they are being replaced in more and more situations. Some including those "counter users". Like, for example, cash registers used to be basically a PC with some specialized peripherals (scanners, tray), where I see more and more of these being replaced by iPads just eating at normal restaurants that I do.
As for the DMV, what would prevent replacing their stupid terminals with say an iPad shoved in a immovable case stuck to a desk? Really nothing. And it could run the exact same software that the guy using an iPad during the driving tests uses. Or the manager who does actually move around (usually just one part of the building to another, but still "mobile").
s to the dockable component - that's simply semantics. If you dock your phone and then start using an external keyboard, mouse and monitor, then you're USING A DESKTOP.
No, I'm using a phone/tablet with alternate input devices and an alternate monitor, but it is doing what I normally would with a desktop. Which is exactly why some desktops will be replaced this way.
Smartphones will replace desktops in more and more situations in the business world (this is already happening). I know of a few companies, mostly startups, but there are a few big names as well that issue employees tablets where traditionally it would have been a laptop.
Next phase is dockable (via a physical connector or wireless/bluetooth) phones/tablets with real keyboard, mice, monitor, and network connections. Once phones get software that support this and can instantly switch to a more desktop like environment you will see desktops/laptops disappear from a large portion of businesses. There is very little reason why phones can't present a desktop-like environment and allow the user to compose emails, write documents, update spreadsheets, do powerpoint presentations, or even light photoshopping. Pick the phone up and walk away when you are done.
It is probably more of side effect than a direct effect. They same would likely be true of any social media link back you put on the site.
Google's very basic ranking algorithm is the more sites that link to yours, and the better those sources are, the higher your page ranks. Given that, I could also say that if you put my button on your site that all it does is register the page in a database and outputs some blurb on a page on my site that links back to the page you clicked AND google crawls my page, then it has the exact same effect.
The rest was likely dumbed-down for the journalist who took a creative license/spin on how they technology works. It wasn't necessarily that it was a social media platform by google, just that it does in some way create link backs to the page. Since I wasn't there at the meeting, I couldn't tell you how to it was presented, but experience tells me that the journalist was likely half listening and half spinning.
First, IANAL, however after reading Grayned v. Rockford, it doesn't support what you say.
Grayned v. Rockford was about the constitutionality of two city ordinances in which demonstrators were arrested while protesting outside a school while school was in session.
The first ordinance, the "anti-picketing" ordinance was ruled as unconstitutional by the Supreme count of Illinois.
The second ordinance, the "anti-noise" ordinance was ruled constitutional, but was only violated because of where, when AND manner that speech was exercised. They could have done any two of those things, but only when all three were done (adjacent to a school, during/30-minutes prior or after school session, AND loud enough to disrupt regular school operation) was in violation of the law.
According to Grayned v. Rockford, they didn't need a PERMIT, nor was there a way to get a PERMIT to do what they did (make enough noise close enough to a school to disrupt it's normal operation). While an interesting case, it simply doesn't support what you say it does. The government isn't regulating free speech in this case. It is however interpreting what happens when one's right to free speech violates another's rights, and deciding which takes priority and codifies it in law.
So fire anyone who could keep them honest, keep all the money for themselves and your lawn still won't look any better.
I'd rather be paying 2 dishonest guys to do a crappy job of cutting my lawn than 100 worthless guys to do a crappy job of cutting my lawn. Making the lawn cutting team larger doesn't mean it'll get automatically be better, but it will automatically mean it'll cost more. Even if it is "better", I doubt it is 50 times better than the job the 2 guys would do.
Also, if government does end up with a few too many people because it has really strong worker's rights, I'm actually okay with that because the pay tends to be below industry levels and their conditions set a benchmark to measure the private sector against.
You might be ok with that because you don't see what actually goes on in the government. I've been involved enough that I see just how ridiculous it really is. Below industry levels? Really? Where and when did that ever happen?
Should I tell you the story about the mid-level government worker who was so incompetent, yet unable to be fired he had all responsibilities stripped from him except one simple data entry responsibility that should have taken 30 minutes a day to do, yet never got done? It got outsourced to a private company eventually, and he just clicked a button everyday and got reports on what the private company did. He never read the reports, and clicked that button once a week instead of the daily he was supposed to. And he got paid silly amounts of money to do it on top of the silly good benefits.
Or maybe the mid/high level government employee who traveled all over the world and got financial budgets passed to do TV commercials so they could set themselves up in the private sector to start their own company? Oh yeah, this was during the recession too.
If you think the best way is to make the government larger so we can get more of that in a larger scale, well... You need to spend some quality time working with the government. It really will open your eyes. Smaller, more local governments work much better in every case I've seen. Even then there is so much fat and waste that we could probably lose half the government workers and not notice a difference.
Going by that logic, you'd be better off hiring 100 people to go cut your lawn, because a larger lawn cutting team is more likely to outperform a smaller one. And this way, you get to pay for all 100 people, and you don't get to pick them, and if they burn your grass or don't show up on time (or drunk), you can't do anything about it because you didn't hire them.
But every 4 years you get to decide if you want to hire the group that says the reason they can't get your lawn cause is because they need another 10 people to do study on why the other 100 are useless, so they need to raise the rate you pay them by 10%. Of course the other group which may just put 98 of those 100 useless government workers (I mean lawn care specialists) out of a job, but that seems like the more logical choice to me.
And *MOST* people simply don't have these issues in the US. Those that do are usually well aware of why they are having these issues -- usually because they chose a location that is far away from other people or surrounded by undeveloped land.
I may have not misread your last sentence, but it is also not true. The 1800X uses about 35%-40% more power than the 7700K. Go check any review where they actually measure the power draw.
No, have you not taken off your AMD rose colored glasses lately? Name your segment (IoT, laptop, desktop, or server) and the fastest performing AMD chip, and I'll respond with an Intel one that outperforms it. Sure, if you limit yourself based on price, then AMD competes, but we aren't talking about a performance/price comparison, it was is the "crown for performance" as YOU specified.
The what? AMD doesn't have anything available that competes at the high end performance wise, and hasn't for a very long time. As for low power, except at the extremely low end, intel chips require a lot less power than their AMD equivalent at the same performance level.
I never really thought about it, but this is how I learn a lot of things myself, and I've noticed a similar behavior in how my son learns as well. I can often look at my browser and see a tab history of just how I fell down into the rabbit hole of reading about x because it was mentioned in y which I wanted more detail on because I started reading about z.
And... I'll be able to fit maybe one 4k UHD movie on my media server on my phone that way, and it'll choke horribly trying to play it as it doesn't have the CPU power necessary in order to be able to decode it in real time.
Well yes, there is a major problem with fiscal policy (and corruption) in Illinois. Lots of which come from lifetime pension deals for the government employees (sometimes multiple lifetime pension deals to the same individual, even if they only worked a single day!).
The software in question really shouldn't do something this drastic without a second window saying "This will erase files from disk. Are you sure you intend to do this?"
It did actually. He said it came up and warned him "are sure to discard all the changes?" (his words) and he clicked yes. Since he hadn't ever checked anything in, his changes were what he had done in the past 3 months.
No backups, no source control for 3 months, a guy who doesn't know what source control is or does, and just clicks on warning messages without understanding them is his fault. Regular backups would have saved him. Actually using source control would have saved him. Reading the damn prompt and actually being sure before clicking "Are you sure" would have saved him. Another prompt asking are you really really sure isn't going to save him from himself.
Slashdot Mirror
I have comcast, was down for 3 days before they got it restored, and my bill was current. And I pay more for my internet with comcast then I would would google fiber.
If this was comcast, I would have been on the phone for an hour only to be told I needed to call a different department that was now closed. If this is how google mistreats people, please SIGN ME UP!
I disagree with you both your assessment and the "studies" reaching conclusion.
The study proves (weakly) that users who binge watch a tv show can recall it for less time. That makes sense. However, I hate watching shows weekly. Those shows that aren't released a season at a time, I will DVR them for the season and only begin watching them when the season ends.
I mostly agree with what you've said. I've noticed that between those two groups of IT workers, only about 10% of them actually enjoy their field, and take an active role in learning new things. The active guys (I'm one of them, BTW) will likely be around forever.
I'm currently on a team (and all teams I've been on have pretty much been that way) that consists of mostly junior developers who knock out code quite honestly faster than I can in most cases. However, 2-3 times a day I get questions from these junior programmers on why their stuff doesn't work, or how to do something they don't know how to do. Occasionally, I catch something that is being committed or included in a discussion where the plan was to do something really stupid that's been known and solved for a decade or more.
So... While my actual coding output may be more average on the team, I also keep the other 7 junior level developers productivity up, and keep the company from some major financial issues (lawsuits, losing customers, etc) all while increasing the quality of the solutions we deliver. That means lowering our maintenance costs, QA costs, and usually happier clients when we deliver what we promised -- or delivering what the client actually *wants*, not what they actually asked for. I see this trend continuing as the millennials grow up. 80-90% will change careers or move up in the management, while the remaining 10-20% oversee people more junior than themselves.
Of course, sometimes I get bored and take a quick consulting job where they need something done quickly and done right the first time and are willing to pay me to do it. Could be they want a solid design that works, or sometimes it's using some ancient tech or software (ancient as in 10+ years old). Sometimes it's just for fun, sometimes to break the monotony, sometimes to work solo, and almost always for the money.
If this is not multi tasking, I don't know what is
Well, it's good you realize you don't know what multitasking is I suppose. That exact scenario in most cases could be done via task switching. Although, to be fair, phones today actually do real multitasking instead of task switching so the point is mostly moot.
At a rudimentary level (please, I'm not trying to describe the difference between real multitasking and pseudo multitasking here), multitasking is the ability for multiple programs to run at the same time, where task switching is when you switch from one program to another the prior one freezes until you switch back to it. Whether you can see both at the same time or not (side by side, or windowed) doesn't describe multitasking vs task switching. It's very possible to be using task switching, and see a window in the background that isn't updating/computing/working. For example, if you have a browser window and it is displaying a real time clock and you switch windows to edit email and the clock stops until you switch back, then that is task switching, and good enough for the vast majority of people. They aren't switching away from excel that takes 20 minutes to calculate to go do something else. By the time they switch away, it is already done doing what it needs to do, and could be frozen. Now this would cause a problem if it was playing music or a video in the background, which yes, there are some cases in which that would be nice or even necessary but that is pretty rare, and as I said, phones already do that today, so it doesn't really matter.
iPhones are multitasking, but you can switch them to be more like task switching by going into the control panel->General->Background App Refresh and turn it off. That will "freeze" most applications when you switch away from it instead of letting it continue to run in the background. While not true task switching, it has a similar effect, and increases battery life. Most applications, and most people don't notice the difference usually. iPhones also auto-enable this globally when in "Low power mode" (last 20% of your battery life I believe).
Reading comprehension really isn't your thing. "and can instantly switch" should have been pretty clear.
This is probably because you have no real business experience and/or no ability to see beyond your own circumstance.
You'd be very very wrong. Perhaps you need to look in the mirror.
Explain how to use CADD design software on a smartphone where the standard use case is TWO 24" or 27" monitors. Or explain how you perform accounting analysis using a spreadsheet with 8000000 rows and 15000 columns on a smartphone. Or how you model or design pretty much anything with a smartphone. Or how you do any graphical design on a smartphone. Or explain how a programmer can reliably program, debug and compile code on a smartphone. Anyone doing any real business outside sales does it on real computers and that's not going to change.
I'm not even going to argue with your examples. Many of these could easily be replaced (and some have already been replaced!), but these aren't representative of the most use cases of desktop today. They represent a very small fraction of them, and since I didn't say desktops were going extinct, just that many are being replaced with phones and tablets, there is no point in discussing it further.
In the real world most people who aren't sales need real computers with big monitors and keyboards and mice.
No they don't. Not by a very very very long shot. Most people don't really need big monitors, and most don't need a dedicated keyboard or even a mouse if they have a touchscreen for input. But, a phone with a docking station would work just as well for 98% of all computer users given the right software.
Remote desktop isn't the same thing. It's similar, but different. With remote desktop you need a network connection to do any work, and you need a server to actually do the work.
The operating systems running on cell phones are poorly suited to multitasking, and thus do not offer a particularly productive environment to work in when they are connected to a screen with a mouse and keyboard.
Most users don't really need multitasking AT ALL. They need exactly what mobile operating systems offer which is task switching, and they do that quite well. The keyboard/mouse has nothing to do with anything.
Startups are interesting to watch because they aren't already entrenched in a particular way of doing something, so often you can spot up coming trends based on what they do differently. Not always of course, but it is one indicator of many.
I didn't say desktops were going away completely. I said they are being replaced in more and more situations. Some including those "counter users". Like, for example, cash registers used to be basically a PC with some specialized peripherals (scanners, tray), where I see more and more of these being replaced by iPads just eating at normal restaurants that I do.
As for the DMV, what would prevent replacing their stupid terminals with say an iPad shoved in a immovable case stuck to a desk? Really nothing. And it could run the exact same software that the guy using an iPad during the driving tests uses. Or the manager who does actually move around (usually just one part of the building to another, but still "mobile").
s to the dockable component - that's simply semantics. If you dock your phone and then start using an external keyboard, mouse and monitor, then you're USING A DESKTOP.
No, I'm using a phone/tablet with alternate input devices and an alternate monitor, but it is doing what I normally would with a desktop. Which is exactly why some desktops will be replaced this way.
I would have to say your analysis is wrong.
Smartphones will replace desktops in more and more situations in the business world (this is already happening). I know of a few companies, mostly startups, but there are a few big names as well that issue employees tablets where traditionally it would have been a laptop.
Next phase is dockable (via a physical connector or wireless/bluetooth) phones/tablets with real keyboard, mice, monitor, and network connections. Once phones get software that support this and can instantly switch to a more desktop like environment you will see desktops/laptops disappear from a large portion of businesses. There is very little reason why phones can't present a desktop-like environment and allow the user to compose emails, write documents, update spreadsheets, do powerpoint presentations, or even light photoshopping. Pick the phone up and walk away when you are done.
It is probably more of side effect than a direct effect. They same would likely be true of any social media link back you put on the site.
Google's very basic ranking algorithm is the more sites that link to yours, and the better those sources are, the higher your page ranks. Given that, I could also say that if you put my button on your site that all it does is register the page in a database and outputs some blurb on a page on my site that links back to the page you clicked AND google crawls my page, then it has the exact same effect.
The rest was likely dumbed-down for the journalist who took a creative license/spin on how they technology works. It wasn't necessarily that it was a social media platform by google, just that it does in some way create link backs to the page. Since I wasn't there at the meeting, I couldn't tell you how to it was presented, but experience tells me that the journalist was likely half listening and half spinning.
First, IANAL, however after reading Grayned v. Rockford, it doesn't support what you say.
Grayned v. Rockford was about the constitutionality of two city ordinances in which demonstrators were arrested while protesting outside a school while school was in session.
The first ordinance, the "anti-picketing" ordinance was ruled as unconstitutional by the Supreme count of Illinois.
The second ordinance, the "anti-noise" ordinance was ruled constitutional, but was only violated because of where, when AND manner that speech was exercised. They could have done any two of those things, but only when all three were done (adjacent to a school, during/30-minutes prior or after school session, AND loud enough to disrupt regular school operation) was in violation of the law.
According to Grayned v. Rockford, they didn't need a PERMIT, nor was there a way to get a PERMIT to do what they did (make enough noise close enough to a school to disrupt it's normal operation). While an interesting case, it simply doesn't support what you say it does. The government isn't regulating free speech in this case. It is however interpreting what happens when one's right to free speech violates another's rights, and deciding which takes priority and codifies it in law.
So fire anyone who could keep them honest, keep all the money for themselves and your lawn still won't look any better.
I'd rather be paying 2 dishonest guys to do a crappy job of cutting my lawn than 100 worthless guys to do a crappy job of cutting my lawn. Making the lawn cutting team larger doesn't mean it'll get automatically be better, but it will automatically mean it'll cost more. Even if it is "better", I doubt it is 50 times better than the job the 2 guys would do.
Also, if government does end up with a few too many people because it has really strong worker's rights, I'm actually okay with that because the pay tends to be below industry levels and their conditions set a benchmark to measure the private sector against.
You might be ok with that because you don't see what actually goes on in the government. I've been involved enough that I see just how ridiculous it really is. Below industry levels? Really? Where and when did that ever happen?
Should I tell you the story about the mid-level government worker who was so incompetent, yet unable to be fired he had all responsibilities stripped from him except one simple data entry responsibility that should have taken 30 minutes a day to do, yet never got done? It got outsourced to a private company eventually, and he just clicked a button everyday and got reports on what the private company did. He never read the reports, and clicked that button once a week instead of the daily he was supposed to. And he got paid silly amounts of money to do it on top of the silly good benefits.
Or maybe the mid/high level government employee who traveled all over the world and got financial budgets passed to do TV commercials so they could set themselves up in the private sector to start their own company? Oh yeah, this was during the recession too.
If you think the best way is to make the government larger so we can get more of that in a larger scale, well... You need to spend some quality time working with the government. It really will open your eyes. Smaller, more local governments work much better in every case I've seen. Even then there is so much fat and waste that we could probably lose half the government workers and not notice a difference.
Going by that logic, you'd be better off hiring 100 people to go cut your lawn, because a larger lawn cutting team is more likely to outperform a smaller one. And this way, you get to pay for all 100 people, and you don't get to pick them, and if they burn your grass or don't show up on time (or drunk), you can't do anything about it because you didn't hire them.
But every 4 years you get to decide if you want to hire the group that says the reason they can't get your lawn cause is because they need another 10 people to do study on why the other 100 are useless, so they need to raise the rate you pay them by 10%. Of course the other group which may just put 98 of those 100 useless government workers (I mean lawn care specialists) out of a job, but that seems like the more logical choice to me.
Enjoy.
And *MOST* people simply don't have these issues in the US. Those that do are usually well aware of why they are having these issues -- usually because they chose a location that is far away from other people or surrounded by undeveloped land.
They've forked to separate themselves from all the negativity, so I'd suggest yesde.js
I tend to agree with your general line of thinking, but we aren't there yet, and probably won't be for at least 3-5 years.
AMD with $1.1b in revenue vs intel with $14.8b in revenue in the most recent quarter.
AMD with $25m in profit, Intel with $3,500 in profit.
Volume doesn't really mean much if you are losing money on each and every one of them.
I may have not misread your last sentence, but it is also not true. The 1800X uses about 35%-40% more power than the 7700K. Go check any review where they actually measure the power draw.
Umm... did you wake up from a coma recently?
No, have you not taken off your AMD rose colored glasses lately? Name your segment (IoT, laptop, desktop, or server) and the fastest performing AMD chip, and I'll respond with an Intel one that outperforms it. Sure, if you limit yourself based on price, then AMD competes, but we aren't talking about a performance/price comparison, it was is the "crown for performance" as YOU specified.
The what? AMD doesn't have anything available that competes at the high end performance wise, and hasn't for a very long time. As for low power, except at the extremely low end, intel chips require a lot less power than their AMD equivalent at the same performance level.
I never really thought about it, but this is how I learn a lot of things myself, and I've noticed a similar behavior in how my son learns as well. I can often look at my browser and see a tab history of just how I fell down into the rabbit hole of reading about x because it was mentioned in y which I wanted more detail on because I started reading about z.
And... I'll be able to fit maybe one 4k UHD movie on my media server on my phone that way, and it'll choke horribly trying to play it as it doesn't have the CPU power necessary in order to be able to decode it in real time.
Twice?
Well yes, there is a major problem with fiscal policy (and corruption) in Illinois. Lots of which come from lifetime pension deals for the government employees (sometimes multiple lifetime pension deals to the same individual, even if they only worked a single day!).
Income from a lemonade stand is already taxable. Check www.irs.gov.
Also, you are required to get a city permit (let's just call that a flat tax) in many places: http://www.nydailynews.com/lif...
Taxes are literally everywhere. It's just the amount and to whom that changes.
The software in question really shouldn't do something this drastic without a second window saying "This will erase files from disk. Are you sure you intend to do this?"
It did actually. He said it came up and warned him "are sure to discard all the changes?" (his words) and he clicked yes. Since he hadn't ever checked anything in, his changes were what he had done in the past 3 months.
No backups, no source control for 3 months, a guy who doesn't know what source control is or does, and just clicks on warning messages without understanding them is his fault. Regular backups would have saved him. Actually using source control would have saved him. Reading the damn prompt and actually being sure before clicking "Are you sure" would have saved him. Another prompt asking are you really really sure isn't going to save him from himself.