Where I live, they just ran the first annual "Walk for the cure", where fund-raisers walk 60kms over two days to raise money to "Cure breast cancer".
They've run this elsewhere and raised lots of money, but the advertising blitz (on my favorite radio station) was just too much. The word "cure" was in every other sentence and it made me so angry I wanted to scream (yelled at the radio a few times:)
Finding a "cure" for cancer is like finding a cure for rust. There is none, we can't just de-oxidize the metal. The best we have is to remove the existing rust, re-coat what hasn't rusted, and weld in a new piece of metal. This is much like removing and replacing a cancerous organ.
Moreover, the walk advertises that they want to "make breast cancer history", which demonstrates complete ignorance about the very nature of cancer. These guys don't just want a cure, they want to find a way to make it that no one ever "contracts" breast cancer!
And what angers me the most is general ignorance. They don't know that our best lead right now is to inject a virus that modifies their DNA (retro-viral). Fundamental DNA modification! That's nothing close to our definition of a cure, that's just a futuristic form of surgery.
I'm on the band-wagon with the "Special Features required". I won't pay for a downloaded movie w/o the Special Features. But I don't think that we are without hope here.
DivX 6, released a full year ago, has the features required to effectively make a video file into a DVD (subtitles, menus, etc.). Apple has the benefit of closed formats, so what's to stop them from providing an "enhanced video" file that implements the DVD features. I'd like to believe that they'd have the foresight to handle the Special Features issue.
If they don't then I suspect they may be hindering their sales. Of course, they could just come out with an external backup drive / media server and pitch the whole kit as a "cool new idea". This may get the fish biting. Of course, us slashdotters will just rip our DVDs like we always have:)
Are you a Radio Shack employee? Don't like what they're doing? Then leave and tell them why you're leaving! Copy your manager and their manager and give them a month notice (or whatever time you figure you need to make up the salary).
This site is filled with Dice ads telling you to "Get the respect you deserve", but the truth is that you won't receive that respect unless you're willing to play your cards. At the ultimate that means leaving the company. When it comes up at your next interview, explain that you did not appreciate the treatment of "other" employees and leave it at that. If they balk at that, then they're probably no better.
The truth is, we "cogs" are mostly revenue streams. When we do a good job we make money for the company and take our cut. If we're too scared to leave, then we let the company decide our cut. It seems forgotten that we have the ultimate leverage here, when we leave, so does the revenue stream.
There is a line where our revenue stream does not generate enough profits, it is our job to know that line and push towards it. It is the company's job to push the other way to maximize profits and keep us happy at the same time. It's a simple game (with infinite complexity).
Complaining about poor practices does nothing but make loud noises. After reading this post, I would avoid working at Radio Shack like it was the plague. If you're on this boat, then do the same and tell the story to all of your friends and hope that they do the same. The Shack laid off hundreds of people, but unless hundreds more leave in disgust, then nobody there will care that we/.ers wagged our bony fingers.
The concept of SKU is to differentiate system from complete, shipping systems that you can purchase as a single unit. When the reviewer receives an "SKU" they're receiving an actual shipping unit rather than a custom-built and specified system.
Not that I really like the concept myself, but it may have arisen from previous complaints about "system" being too nebulous or being different from items that could be purchased (anything with an SKU can be purchased).
Public Money: money with no accountability will lead to overruns and failures.
Project Scope: this type of project is huge, the next project is more huge. Large projects are more prone to mistakes, this type of project should consist of several short-term deliverables.
Security Issues: the FBI requires security clearance, when contractors are involved, this type of red-tape will cause serious issues.
Internal Management: the project is managed internally, but then outsourced. Any contracting firm is only accountable to deliver on its promises. If the system is failing testing then it is project management's job to ensure that promises are met. Right now, the only accoutable bodies are FBI's Internal Management, that's their job. Of course (by my first point), they're rarely accountable, so all of this money just gets flushed.
So what's the solution? Fire the Management responsible for this project.
Management is paid specifically for successful delivery of the project. If they do not deliver the project, they have failed. If they have not been fired, what incentive do they have to make this project succeed? If they cannot be fired, then we've found the fundamental flaw.
You reap what you sow here. If you the taxpayers want union-protected workers who are nearly impossible to fire, then you will get workers who will not be accountable. As long as the rules in government are focused on survival then government workers will continue to CYA (cover your ass), defer decisions and blow money to protect their current position/empire.
And don't blame the government employees here, they're playing the game. The public set the rules and employees play by the rules. People are fired for not playing by the rules. If you feel that the wrong people are (not) being fired, then request that rules of the game be changed. You reap what you sow.
The basic reality is that quality of tools does not have a tight correlation with quality of education.
Higer quality tools can enable higer quality education, but only if you have quality educators. A great teacher with Paper/Pencil/Chalkboard/Books will outperform a mediocre teacher with a $30,000 multimedia classroom.
Without a quality digital textbook, the OLPC is just an over-priced paper-weight. Now, if a quality piece of educational material is created for the OLPC, then we can help teachers with better tools. But nothing here is replacing kinesthetic learning, the OLPC is not a good substitute for a little real-world experimentation.
Right now, the OLPC is just an expensive version of Paper/Pencil/Books. Until we have quality educational software, until the teacher can use the OLPC to improve feedback, customize learning and decrease learning time, this thing is just a toy.
Personally I'm amazed that anyone with the will to create such a tool as the OLPC did not have the foresight to incorporate curriculum and learning materials. We have a giant hammer with no nails and no lumber, some plan.
The fact is you're already investing tons and tons of money on your education. If you have money to burn, spend it on getting good grades (legally of course:). Get good grades.
You can waste time trying to make 10% on your 10k loan (~4k over 4 years) or you can be successful in school and make an extra 5k+ on your starting salary (every year).
Good grades also lead to scholarships, opportunities for Co-op position or research assistant positions. Where I'm from (University of Manitoba), the marking and teaching assistant positions pay way better than McJobs, they're conveniently located on campus and you get incomparable experience.
Your education is a huge investment, you can dick around and try investing "extra money" or you can focus on being the top of your class. Do the latter and you won't need to worry about the "few grand" you could've made in College. The best of the best effectively get paid to go University, why not be one of them?
OK, development time is definitely not static. Project preparation can drastically reduce dev time. Poor project planning and shifting requirements can easily double or triple dev time.
Each hour spent programming & each line of code has a certain % chance of causing a bug. More lines of code, more hours banging out code means that we have more bugs. We want to reduce bugs, so we want to reduce lines of code and reduce time spent programming.
When I spend two hours refining a Document or Design. I am doing so with the goal of actually removing future bugs. When I spend two hours testing, I am doing so with the goal of locating (& reducing) existing bugs. So time spent "not coding" is actually time spent reducing bugs in the system.
So if more coding = more bugs and more documenting = less bugs, then it seems pretty clear, that spending less time coding will reduce bugs.
The goal is to spend very little time actually programming as more time programming basically means more time generating bugs.
Hey man, that was great! But I feel that your blame is misplaced. In a case like this, the blame belongs solely on the shoulders of the respective managers.
Your manager should have been irate at the user's manager for wasting IT's time. Any overtime worked should have been taken off the next day (as appropriate) and your manager should have been apologetic. The employee with the "missing" keyboard should've been verbally reprimanded by their manager and also should've apologized (to both you and your manager).
If your manager does not stand up for the work which you are performing, then it's time to talk to HR.
Viewing this as a "stupid user" problem may be convenient, but clearly places the blame on the wrong shoulders. The user may have been inept and made a poor decision (lock door and leave for lunch), but the true failure is here is management's handling of the situation.
Look, IT people use this term b/c they do work similar to Architecting or Engineering.
I would be happy to have a governing Engineering body. I would be love to be able to stamp my Data Models and sign my Reqs docs with authority. Heck, I would love to make System Analysts and Architects legally accountable for their work. It may even help raise my rates to be even with that of a Professional Engineer.
Even though I will dutifully agree that it may seem like theft of the term, the IT community is equally aggrieved that they cannot receive these titles despite their attempts. Other Engineers simply don't want to recognize Software Engineers b/c we're in our infancy and we don't have standards to which we can be held. This is really nobody's fault, but don't be angered that we are using your words, we would love to justify that use.
In the big supply-demand chain, if you are bidding on high demand / low supply items then you'll get raked across the coals with last-minute sniping. But if you want tickets to tonight's Aerosmith, then that's what you're facing.
I'm into Magic cards (i.e. collectibles), where the bidding is often very different. For the most part e-bay doesn't have oodles of truly unique collectibles, just a few. If I'm looking for specific batch of Magic cards, I just set e-bay to e-mail me every couple of days when new auctions come up. When I find an auction I place my max bid and then I forget it. There's enough throughput on e-bay that I can just bid on the next one.
With a 50% variation on some similar auctions and various ending times (to foil snipers?), I don't have to watch over my bid. If I'm not getting my item for $X then I can raise my future bids or just keep trying. Again, these items are always coming up for auction, so this is ideal for the set it and leave it approach. Every once in a while, you'll even get a dead fish, where you're the only "real" bidder and you hit that 50% cheaper mark. I've bottom-fed a good part of my collection in this fashion.
In this case, the snipers just get their cards earlier (in exchange for paying more). And I stand the best chances of getting my goods for the price I'm willing to pay.
Yeah... this seems to be the forgotten aspect of data backup.
"Just buy a drive", I hear people say, which is great until you learn that they leave their "backup" drive right next to their normal one.
A backup is supposed to protect against two things:
Hardware failure
Environmental failure (theft, fire, flood, etc.)
Nothing personal, but leaving the USB drive "hanging around" basically nullifies 50% of the backup's purpose. If you've got a backup drive at least drop it in your safety deposit box, or keep it in your backpack/car/office drawer for safekeeping.
Many posters have mentioned their hesitance towards digital goods and their intent to ignore purely digital content. Though I applaud your desire for continued use of hard goods, I do not believe that digital goods should simply be ignored as the potential value is far too great.
As a quick background M:TG (AKA Magic) is a collectible card game. So it is a card game, with its own set of base rules, and each card has its own text indicating its "rules". In addition, it is collectible: cards come in randomized packs and and boxes.
New sets are produced quarterly, and the game is the ultimate cash cow, with a massive secondary market. With some cards going for over $1,000 dollars and others regularly trading for around $20, these pieces of cardboard have some serious value. So how do you bring that on-line?
Magic's makers (Wizards of the Coast) had many battles to fight (pricing, value of digital cards, premium cards, etc.) But in the end, the online is hugely successful. Many Magic players maintain both regular and online card collections. But the game has also opened up to other players. Players from small communities, remote locations, players with families and unusual work shifts, etc. The on-line community has its own timelines, some unique play formats and tournaments and its always accessible.
So how did they price it? Product costs the same online as their MSRP in stores. Online has its own secondary market, but the same basic price going in to the system. Indeed, people are paying the same price for digital goods!
The Point? Why would I pay money for digital product? B/c it's worth my money! I get lots of play time out of Magic Online. Tediums like card sorting and deck building are drastically reduced. Wizards actually used the digital medium to add value to their product.
When the media industries decide to use digital mediums to add value to our purchases they will secure more business. iTunes makes sales on the basis that they add the value of simplicity and selection: pick these songs, drop them on your iPod, play them on your computer, get new ones instantly, no CDs, no lines, no problem. Sure, some of this reasoning may be specious, but the people who feel this way are the people buying songs from iTunes.
These people make sacrifices in quality and hard media for all of these other perks, just like the Magic players eschew the real cards for the ability to play more with the cards they have online.
Once movies are better on my HDD than on a DVD, then I will move to that media. Many of the digital features of music do not carry the same weight for movies. Having an iTunes for movies would be "cool", but it's far less useful for movies than music. A reduced-quality audio recording is sufficient for most of the places we listen to music: in a car with stock speakers, on a bus with average headphones, in a room with a boom-box, etc. But a reduced-quality video is insufficient for my Home Theatre. Ease-of-use and sound/image quality is a major DVD feature, I don't see how low-quality digital is going to provide me with enough redeeming features to eschew my hard copy.
So until DVDs are better on my HDD, I plan to keep buying second-hand DVDs from the movie store.
I've got no mod points, so here's my "post of agreement".
The rubber or silicone nosepads on my new glasses would start "greening" after a few months. Nosepad replacements suffered the same fate. Some of the green actually appeared to be dirt or grime, but even after removing it, the Green would spread to the inside of the nosepad where it couldn't be removed.
I've only know one other person with this strange issue: my father.
IANA Biologist / Chemist, but it seems pretty obvious to me that humans have variations (genetic and dietary) in their sebum secretions. The yellowing Macs are probably the result of these variations. They probably just caught on to a relatively common variation rather than my rare "Green variation".
The truth is, Democracy's a little flaky. When 49% of the people are over-ruled by 51% of the people, this is usually cause for uprising, just not in the States.
Look at the Orange Revolution. People took days off of work and organized mass protests because they felt they had been ripped off. I did not hear similar stories in the states. I heard that the Florida recount results were not announced as "we were in a state of war", but I didn't hear stories of millions marching in the streets of Miami demanding that the recount be announced and that changes be rectified. Did I miss something? or was there really no one in the streets?
Nah, everyone is well-fed, entertained and comfortable, so nobody complains. Apathy and ignorance are blissful states and there will be no "getting together" until people start starving and losing their homes. (Hurricanes not withstanding)
OK, this questions definitely has flamebait written all over it. Here are the quick answers.
Tell the boss that VB6 is end-of-lifed, equivalent to starting a new project for Windows '98 systems.
Tell the boss that VB.NET is fully supported by MS, provides the same basic functionality (and more). VB.NET will be a language for the future.
Ignore the illusion that C# is different from VB.NET, they are different languages with about 98% of the same functionality.
Investigate upgrading possibilities. I know the boss wants you to rewrite software, but this is actually rarely the case. Check out the MS site for tons of docs on upgrading from VB to.NET. You'll probably find that you can rewrite pieces one-at-a-time and still keep a stable system.
On a related note, VB is a not really a language, it's a RAD tool. The goal of VB code is to quickly produce a working product. I've worked with a few n-tier VB apps, but the language really peters out at this point (you end up "faking" inheritance just to get things working)
Friendly tips when you move to.NET
Start working with VS 2005 and.NET 2.0 (skip VS 2003)
Buy a VB.NET book and read it. If you know VB and you've worked with OO languages, then a quick read-through will tie things together.
Share your newfound.NET knowledge with your co-workers and your boss, this will help to make him comfortable that you're not butchering his baby.
Grab the Data Access Application Block from MS (gotdotnet may have a better one). ADO.NET Datasets are very different from ADO Recordsets. Using the DAAB will help the transition and will likely save you some time.
When you're rewriting the VB application, start with a framework and look for similar / inherited objects and functionality. VB doesn't have true inheritance and is very prone to spaghetti code. Putting code / logic in the right places will likely be the toughest part of the rewrite. Do it first, save grief later.
We've had some accountability issues here in Canada. In fact, our new Prime Minister campaigned with promises of increased government accountability. It would seem that we want more whistleblowers.
Though, this example is provincial, not federal, it seems that Canada is taking steps in the opposite direction. After the recent sponsorship scandal, and (here in Manitoba) the Crocus Investment Scandal, there has been a serious push for whistleblower protection.
No word yet on what Harper is actually going to implement (sounds like he's under a mountain of recommendations). But given that he hasn't even had power for a year, I think he has some time.
Hey, hey, so I understand that there is a balancing act. But making consumers wait for 2 or 3 months to purchase a new product is a huge failure.
And really, as a consumer, I don't care about the "balancing act". Though I appreciate complexity, someone at Nintendo or MS or Sony is very well paid to manage that complexity. Their job is to put product in the hands of those who want to pay for it.
If this means that they charge more for the first shipment (while providing some special promo, like a free faceplate), and as a result they just barely sell out; then they've met the demand. Sure some people might be annoyed, but they have the comfort of knowing that the they'll get their system cheaper on the next shipment. And the guys who paid "too much" will have the glory of being the "first on their block".
And hey, now nobody's unhappy! Those people who couldn't afford the system didn't buy it (and vice-versa). Those who own a system have exclusivity. System-maker has their money, they've helped mitigate the extra warehousing costs and people who want the system can purchase one off of the shelf. In 3 or 6 or 9 months, the price will drop and those people who previously couldn't afford the system will now be in price-range and we sell more systems without missed sales.
But now I'm being pedantic, this is economics 101!
Suffice to say that failure to provide enough systems at launch is truly a colossal failure. Nintendo's current advantage is their low price-point. PS3's current weakness is their high price-point. But if I can't buy either come November (b/c they're both sold out), then what's the difference? I'll just spend my x-mas money on something else and buy the Nintendo later (maybe next x-mas).
In the meanwhile though, I'm won't be buying high-margin accessories or games, I'll spend that money elsewhere. I'm not going to buy more games in July just to make up for the games I didn't buy in February (I already spent February's money)! So failure to provide me a system in November means lost potential sales until I do buy a system...
Talking of units, Nintendo also confirmed that 6 million Wii consoles will be released worldwide at launch, with a further 17 million games being made available.
When the X-box released before x-mas, they sold every single one. Heck, my little bro had his pre-paid at EB in November. We received it in February. If they're going to sell out, why don't they just make more before they start selling? MS doesn't make more money from people re-selling the unit on e-bay, but MS lost a lot of goodwill by failing to deliver a unit in reasonable time.
MS just became a running joke b/c so many people had ordered systems and not received them. I'm sure that this hurt them. I heard rumours of supply-chain issues and given ATI's own supply-chain problems, this may have been true. But, truth or no, it didn't get more systems in more houses, it actually gave potential buyers less exposure, b/c nobody had a system.
I would've bought an XBox 360 in December, I was hyped about them, the marketing blitz was on and I was keen on owning one. But hey, I couldn't buy one! My buddy with the 50" hi-def TV, he couldn't buy one! Nobody could buy one, so we all just moved on. I spent $600 playing Magic instead and now I still don't own a 360 (nor does my buddy:).
But now I hear that Nintendo will have only 6 million units at launch and it's like these marketing guys know something that we don't. I mean, at $250 each, they're going to sell out. And last I heard, sold out products meant lost potential profits! If people want my product and they can't buy it, then I'm giving them the opportunity to just spend their money elsewhere.
This Nintendo Wii is going to spread like wildfire. Casual gamers are going to come out of the cracks, people will marvel at the interactive gaming, just like people who stare at the DDR machines in the movie theatre arcades. But if I have to tell all of my jealous friends (& family) that they cannot have the instant gratification of owning their own system (b/c Nintendo didn't make enough systems) then they're going to move on the Next Big Thing.
Having a limited number of consoles makes the console a highly-valued item, it does not put more consoles in households, it does not increase the system's exposure, it does not sell more games, it just makes people angry that they can't own one of their own.
This is really the curse in software development: Management!
Programmers are not to blame for any of this cr*p. If a project is late, this is management's fault. If a project is buggy, this is management's fault. If a project is insecure, this is management's fault.
This whole concept of inept programmers cranking out big-bucks software (shrink-wrapped or custom-built) is just utter BS!
If the project spec calls for security, then my manager is responsible for ensuring that security is designed, implemented, tested and budgeted in the project plan. If programmers do not know how to implement secure code, then my manager's job is to fire that programmer, train that programmer or move that programmer elsewhere.
When a project has to choose between security and meeting a deadline, then this project was incorrectly planned. Now in management's defense, software planning is extremely difficult and requires all kinds of skills completely unrelated to the development work that got them promoted there in the first place. But hey, that's why they're paid the big bucks.
First off, the real issue here appears to be lack of CS and Math-related research-style positions.
A quick search of job boards will show you that nobody wants to hire entry-level computer programmers / network admins, so anyone quoting a lack of bodies is BSing you. We've discussed this issue on/. before now.
The author may think that he's hit on an issue, but his arguments seem specious and his research is very shallow.
From TA:
The output of American computer science programs is plummeting, even while that of Eastern European and Asian schools is rising. China and India, the new global tech powerhouses, are fueled by 900,000 engineering graduates of all types each year, more than triple the number of U.S. grads
Specious #1: OK, first, if China AND India have ONLY 3x the # of grads, then the US is doing great! China AND India have 2.4 billion people, the US has 0.4 billion people. So the US has 2x as many engineering grads per capita. Why is this number cause for alarm?
Specious #2:What's more, this isn't really the issue anyways! Because your regular CS grads aren't doing "innovative, ground-breaking research", they're programming Database front-ends and administering networks. What you really want to know about are your Masters and PhD grads, but he fails to provide any relevant numbers for these.
My experience: I looked in to taking a Masters in 2004 at my Provincial University (~30k students). I wasn't eligible. I graduated with a 4-year Honours Co-op degree and a B to B+ average. It turns out that they were so flooded with students (mostly foreign) that the required average was now an A and they even closed the application period 3 months early. They were turning away some of their own grads.
So if we've run out of profs and we're turning away interested grads, does that still mean that we're behind? What's really the issue? I'd say it's money.
CS work is difficult. It requires years of study to be correctly proficient and continuous study thereafter. And to top it off, most IT workers are putting in massive overtime and are generally overworked (esp. the Network guys). So IT workers want to be well-paid; but nobody wants to pay for this work!
General programming work is quite expensive and the ROI is usually long if there is one (some software projects have no ROI, they just need to be done). Software itself is expensive to create and productivity of staff varies wildly b/c the learning curve can be very steep. Nobody wants inexperienced IT staff, so IT workers want to be well-paid.
To make this even more expensive, computer programmers in the US are bringing in Internationally exorbitant rates (one IBM programmer for $125/hour or a 25-man team from India?)
So at the end of the day, where do you put the CS PhDs? Where are they going to work? What are you going to pay them? Of course if companies won't afford CS Bachelors what is the industry for CS PhDs? How many CS PhDs do we really need? Wouldn't we rather have the best brains go into Med studies (seems we're always at a Doctor shortage here in Canada)?
(Please if you have answers, I'd like to hear them, these are not meant to be rhetorical questions)
It used to be that Universities were one of the few spots with e-mail access. E-mail was practically a perk.
This is no longer the case. Universities need to spend money on staff e-mail accounts, but spending money on managing thousands of student accounts is really pointless. E-mail is freely available to anyone with a Net connection.
It seems to make more sense to let MS run the e-mail server (and the spam filter and the mess of other pieces) for the students. Now we can pay a little bit of money and provide the ad-free e-mail as a service. Most University usage policies are so limited that my University account is just another account to manage.
As long as students are not required to use the MS e-mail, then the system is pretty fair. As for the CS department... they'll always have their own gear anyways. So the picky CS students can bug their own department for special privileges.
Of course, this could be totally side-stepped by implementing a system like WebCT and requiring that all Staff *actually use* the system. If this is the case, then you don't need e-mail to talk to the prof or your classmates, just leave an online message for them: Problem Solved!
Let's face it, IT's job is to put people out of work, or to reduce the skill level required to do a job. If we're good at it, we can also put ourselves out of work.
This means a few things:
Non-managment "users" generally don't like us. Our new casino accounting system will knock off the need for 5 of the company's 10 accountants. Those 5 accountants are a little peeved, but that's how software generates ROI.
Further IT advancements (i.e.: better server management tools) reduce the effort required by IT staff. If we have 10% more projects, MS and Sun will come out with ways to make us 10% more efficient developers. So we don't need more developers, just newer tools. This of course, means that we actually don't need that many more developers.
These things are not true with many other industries. Backhoe operators don't remove other people's jobs. Civil engineers don't cause construction workers to lose jobs. And neither of these groups are doubling their efficiency every 18 months:)
Reasons IT will suffer:
People do not understand software or hardware. They do not understand programming and databases like they understand (or fear) cars, accounting or moving large piles of dirt. This means that they don't appreciate its complexity.
People do not appreciate the importance of software quality. They understand the importance of a collapsing bridge or a ruined foundation, but IT people are not seen as bridge-builders.
If the average joe does not understand IT complexity, then they don't understand our billing rates and cannot justify our training and salary. IT is still fighting the concepts that software is cheap to make and hardware is cheap to buy and maintain. Clearly, we know that this is not the case.
The Solution:
Professional Organization (leading to)
Professional Certification (leading to)
Increased Accountability (leading to)
Easier justification of our time.
MCSD.NET != P.Eng.
We need a Professional Software Engineer (or equivalent) designation to even begin the process of justifying our "exhorbitant" salaries and to bring to light the understanding of IT's inherent complexities.
If we are viewed as mechanics, then people will pay us as mechanics. If we are viewed as Engineers (and can deliver as such), then people will pay us as Engineers. MS, Sun and RedHat certs. are only part of the picture, we need a self-governing body like engineers, accountants, doctors and lawyers or we will simply become greaseless mechanics and painters that never get dirty. And we don't get respect for that type of labour.
Slashdot Mirror
Where I live, they just ran the first annual "Walk for the cure", where fund-raisers walk 60kms over two days to raise money to "Cure breast cancer".
They've run this elsewhere and raised lots of money, but the advertising blitz (on my favorite radio station) was just too much. The word "cure" was in every other sentence and it made me so angry I wanted to scream (yelled at the radio a few times :)
Finding a "cure" for cancer is like finding a cure for rust. There is none, we can't just de-oxidize the metal. The best we have is to remove the existing rust, re-coat what hasn't rusted, and weld in a new piece of metal. This is much like removing and replacing a cancerous organ.
Moreover, the walk advertises that they want to "make breast cancer history", which demonstrates complete ignorance about the very nature of cancer. These guys don't just want a cure, they want to find a way to make it that no one ever "contracts" breast cancer!
And what angers me the most is general ignorance. They don't know that our best lead right now is to inject a virus that modifies their DNA (retro-viral). Fundamental DNA modification! That's nothing close to our definition of a cure, that's just a futuristic form of surgery.
I'm on the band-wagon with the "Special Features required". I won't pay for a downloaded movie w/o the Special Features. But I don't think that we are without hope here.
DivX 6, released a full year ago, has the features required to effectively make a video file into a DVD (subtitles, menus, etc.). Apple has the benefit of closed formats, so what's to stop them from providing an "enhanced video" file that implements the DVD features. I'd like to believe that they'd have the foresight to handle the Special Features issue.
If they don't then I suspect they may be hindering their sales. Of course, they could just come out with an external backup drive / media server and pitch the whole kit as a "cool new idea". This may get the fish biting. Of course, us slashdotters will just rip our DVDs like we always have :)
Are you a Radio Shack employee? Don't like what they're doing? Then leave and tell them why you're leaving! Copy your manager and their manager and give them a month notice (or whatever time you figure you need to make up the salary).
This site is filled with Dice ads telling you to "Get the respect you deserve", but the truth is that you won't receive that respect unless you're willing to play your cards. At the ultimate that means leaving the company. When it comes up at your next interview, explain that you did not appreciate the treatment of "other" employees and leave it at that. If they balk at that, then they're probably no better.
The truth is, we "cogs" are mostly revenue streams. When we do a good job we make money for the company and take our cut. If we're too scared to leave, then we let the company decide our cut. It seems forgotten that we have the ultimate leverage here, when we leave, so does the revenue stream.
There is a line where our revenue stream does not generate enough profits, it is our job to know that line and push towards it. It is the company's job to push the other way to maximize profits and keep us happy at the same time. It's a simple game (with infinite complexity).
Complaining about poor practices does nothing but make loud noises. After reading this post, I would avoid working at Radio Shack like it was the plague. If you're on this boat, then do the same and tell the story to all of your friends and hope that they do the same. The Shack laid off hundreds of people, but unless hundreds more leave in disgust, then nobody there will care that we /.ers wagged our bony fingers.
The concept of SKU is to differentiate system from complete, shipping systems that you can purchase as a single unit. When the reviewer receives an "SKU" they're receiving an actual shipping unit rather than a custom-built and specified system.
Not that I really like the concept myself, but it may have arisen from previous complaints about "system" being too nebulous or being different from items that could be purchased (anything with an SKU can be purchased).
Let's face it, there are lots of problems here:
So what's the solution? Fire the Management responsible for this project.
Management is paid specifically for successful delivery of the project. If they do not deliver the project, they have failed. If they have not been fired, what incentive do they have to make this project succeed? If they cannot be fired, then we've found the fundamental flaw.
You reap what you sow here. If you the taxpayers want union-protected workers who are nearly impossible to fire, then you will get workers who will not be accountable. As long as the rules in government are focused on survival then government workers will continue to CYA (cover your ass), defer decisions and blow money to protect their current position/empire.
And don't blame the government employees here, they're playing the game. The public set the rules and employees play by the rules. People are fired for not playing by the rules. If you feel that the wrong people are (not) being fired, then request that rules of the game be changed. You reap what you sow.
The basic reality is that quality of tools does not have a tight correlation with quality of education.
Higer quality tools can enable higer quality education, but only if you have quality educators. A great teacher with Paper/Pencil/Chalkboard/Books will outperform a mediocre teacher with a $30,000 multimedia classroom.
Without a quality digital textbook, the OLPC is just an over-priced paper-weight. Now, if a quality piece of educational material is created for the OLPC, then we can help teachers with better tools. But nothing here is replacing kinesthetic learning, the OLPC is not a good substitute for a little real-world experimentation.
Right now, the OLPC is just an expensive version of Paper/Pencil/Books. Until we have quality educational software, until the teacher can use the OLPC to improve feedback, customize learning and decrease learning time, this thing is just a toy.
Personally I'm amazed that anyone with the will to create such a tool as the OLPC did not have the foresight to incorporate curriculum and learning materials. We have a giant hammer with no nails and no lumber, some plan.
The fact is you're already investing tons and tons of money on your education. If you have money to burn, spend it on getting good grades (legally of course :). Get good grades.
You can waste time trying to make 10% on your 10k loan (~4k over 4 years) or you can be successful in school and make an extra 5k+ on your starting salary (every year).
Good grades also lead to scholarships, opportunities for Co-op position or research assistant positions. Where I'm from (University of Manitoba), the marking and teaching assistant positions pay way better than McJobs, they're conveniently located on campus and you get incomparable experience.
Your education is a huge investment, you can dick around and try investing "extra money" or you can focus on being the top of your class. Do the latter and you won't need to worry about the "few grand" you could've made in College. The best of the best effectively get paid to go University, why not be one of them?
I've got no karma points, so thank you for providing such a thorough answer.
OK, development time is definitely not static. Project preparation can drastically reduce dev time. Poor project planning and shifting requirements can easily double or triple dev time.
Each hour spent programming & each line of code has a certain % chance of causing a bug. More lines of code, more hours banging out code means that we have more bugs. We want to reduce bugs, so we want to reduce lines of code and reduce time spent programming.
When I spend two hours refining a Document or Design. I am doing so with the goal of actually removing future bugs. When I spend two hours testing, I am doing so with the goal of locating (& reducing) existing bugs. So time spent "not coding" is actually time spent reducing bugs in the system.
So if more coding = more bugs and more documenting = less bugs, then it seems pretty clear, that spending less time coding will reduce bugs.
The goal is to spend very little time actually programming as more time programming basically means more time generating bugs.
Hey man, that was great! But I feel that your blame is misplaced. In a case like this, the blame belongs solely on the shoulders of the respective managers.
Your manager should have been irate at the user's manager for wasting IT's time. Any overtime worked should have been taken off the next day (as appropriate) and your manager should have been apologetic. The employee with the "missing" keyboard should've been verbally reprimanded by their manager and also should've apologized (to both you and your manager).
If your manager does not stand up for the work which you are performing, then it's time to talk to HR.
Viewing this as a "stupid user" problem may be convenient, but clearly places the blame on the wrong shoulders. The user may have been inept and made a poor decision (lock door and leave for lunch), but the true failure is here is management's handling of the situation.
Wow, thanks for the link, I've just found a birthday gift for my mother!
Look, IT people use this term b/c they do work similar to Architecting or Engineering.
I would be happy to have a governing Engineering body. I would be love to be able to stamp my Data Models and sign my Reqs docs with authority. Heck, I would love to make System Analysts and Architects legally accountable for their work. It may even help raise my rates to be even with that of a Professional Engineer.
Even though I will dutifully agree that it may seem like theft of the term, the IT community is equally aggrieved that they cannot receive these titles despite their attempts. Other Engineers simply don't want to recognize Software Engineers b/c we're in our infancy and we don't have standards to which we can be held. This is really nobody's fault, but don't be angered that we are using your words, we would love to justify that use.
In the big supply-demand chain, if you are bidding on high demand / low supply items then you'll get raked across the coals with last-minute sniping. But if you want tickets to tonight's Aerosmith, then that's what you're facing.
I'm into Magic cards (i.e. collectibles), where the bidding is often very different. For the most part e-bay doesn't have oodles of truly unique collectibles, just a few. If I'm looking for specific batch of Magic cards, I just set e-bay to e-mail me every couple of days when new auctions come up. When I find an auction I place my max bid and then I forget it. There's enough throughput on e-bay that I can just bid on the next one.
With a 50% variation on some similar auctions and various ending times (to foil snipers?), I don't have to watch over my bid. If I'm not getting my item for $X then I can raise my future bids or just keep trying. Again, these items are always coming up for auction, so this is ideal for the set it and leave it approach. Every once in a while, you'll even get a dead fish, where you're the only "real" bidder and you hit that 50% cheaper mark. I've bottom-fed a good part of my collection in this fashion.
In this case, the snipers just get their cards earlier (in exchange for paying more). And I stand the best chances of getting my goods for the price I'm willing to pay.
"Just buy a drive", I hear people say, which is great until you learn that they leave their "backup" drive right next to their normal one.
A backup is supposed to protect against two things:
Nothing personal, but leaving the USB drive "hanging around" basically nullifies 50% of the backup's purpose. If you've got a backup drive at least drop it in your safety deposit box, or keep it in your backpack/car/office drawer for safekeeping.
Many posters have mentioned their hesitance towards digital goods and their intent to ignore purely digital content. Though I applaud your desire for continued use of hard goods, I do not believe that digital goods should simply be ignored as the potential value is far too great.
To wit, check out Magic: the Gathering Online.
As a quick background M:TG (AKA Magic) is a collectible card game. So it is a card game, with its own set of base rules, and each card has its own text indicating its "rules". In addition, it is collectible: cards come in randomized packs and and boxes.
New sets are produced quarterly, and the game is the ultimate cash cow, with a massive secondary market. With some cards going for over $1,000 dollars and others regularly trading for around $20, these pieces of cardboard have some serious value. So how do you bring that on-line?
Magic's makers (Wizards of the Coast) had many battles to fight (pricing, value of digital cards, premium cards, etc.) But in the end, the online is hugely successful. Many Magic players maintain both regular and online card collections. But the game has also opened up to other players. Players from small communities, remote locations, players with families and unusual work shifts, etc. The on-line community has its own timelines, some unique play formats and tournaments and its always accessible.
So how did they price it? Product costs the same online as their MSRP in stores. Online has its own secondary market, but the same basic price going in to the system. Indeed, people are paying the same price for digital goods!
The Point? Why would I pay money for digital product? B/c it's worth my money! I get lots of play time out of Magic Online. Tediums like card sorting and deck building are drastically reduced. Wizards actually used the digital medium to add value to their product.
When the media industries decide to use digital mediums to add value to our purchases they will secure more business. iTunes makes sales on the basis that they add the value of simplicity and selection: pick these songs, drop them on your iPod, play them on your computer, get new ones instantly, no CDs, no lines, no problem. Sure, some of this reasoning may be specious, but the people who feel this way are the people buying songs from iTunes.
These people make sacrifices in quality and hard media for all of these other perks, just like the Magic players eschew the real cards for the ability to play more with the cards they have online.
Once movies are better on my HDD than on a DVD, then I will move to that media. Many of the digital features of music do not carry the same weight for movies. Having an iTunes for movies would be "cool", but it's far less useful for movies than music. A reduced-quality audio recording is sufficient for most of the places we listen to music: in a car with stock speakers, on a bus with average headphones, in a room with a boom-box, etc. But a reduced-quality video is insufficient for my Home Theatre. Ease-of-use and sound/image quality is a major DVD feature, I don't see how low-quality digital is going to provide me with enough redeeming features to eschew my hard copy.
So until DVDs are better on my HDD, I plan to keep buying second-hand DVDs from the movie store.
I've got no mod points, so here's my "post of agreement".
The rubber or silicone nosepads on my new glasses would start "greening" after a few months. Nosepad replacements suffered the same fate. Some of the green actually appeared to be dirt or grime, but even after removing it, the Green would spread to the inside of the nosepad where it couldn't be removed.
I've only know one other person with this strange issue: my father.
IANA Biologist / Chemist, but it seems pretty obvious to me that humans have variations (genetic and dietary) in their sebum secretions. The yellowing Macs are probably the result of these variations. They probably just caught on to a relatively common variation rather than my rare "Green variation".
If so, I think you guys should get together and do it.
Ever seen / read V for Vendetta?
The truth is, Democracy's a little flaky. When 49% of the people are over-ruled by 51% of the people, this is usually cause for uprising, just not in the States.
Look at the Orange Revolution. People took days off of work and organized mass protests because they felt they had been ripped off. I did not hear similar stories in the states. I heard that the Florida recount results were not announced as "we were in a state of war", but I didn't hear stories of millions marching in the streets of Miami demanding that the recount be announced and that changes be rectified. Did I miss something? or was there really no one in the streets?
Nah, everyone is well-fed, entertained and comfortable, so nobody complains. Apathy and ignorance are blissful states and there will be no "getting together" until people start starving and losing their homes. (Hurricanes not withstanding)
OK, this questions definitely has flamebait written all over it. Here are the quick answers.
On a related note, VB is a not really a language, it's a RAD tool. The goal of VB code is to quickly produce a working product. I've worked with a few n-tier VB apps, but the language really peters out at this point (you end up "faking" inheritance just to get things working)
Friendly tips when you move to .NET
We've had some accountability issues here in Canada. In fact, our new Prime Minister campaigned with promises of increased government accountability. It would seem that we want more whistleblowers.
Though, this example is provincial, not federal, it seems that Canada is taking steps in the opposite direction. After the recent sponsorship scandal, and (here in Manitoba) the Crocus Investment Scandal, there has been a serious push for whistleblower protection.
No word yet on what Harper is actually going to implement (sounds like he's under a mountain of recommendations). But given that he hasn't even had power for a year, I think he has some time.
Hey, hey, so I understand that there is a balancing act. But making consumers wait for 2 or 3 months to purchase a new product is a huge failure.
:)
And really, as a consumer, I don't care about the "balancing act". Though I appreciate complexity, someone at Nintendo or MS or Sony is very well paid to manage that complexity. Their job is to put product in the hands of those who want to pay for it.
If this means that they charge more for the first shipment (while providing some special promo, like a free faceplate), and as a result they just barely sell out; then they've met the demand. Sure some people might be annoyed, but they have the comfort of knowing that the they'll get their system cheaper on the next shipment. And the guys who paid "too much" will have the glory of being the "first on their block".
And hey, now nobody's unhappy! Those people who couldn't afford the system didn't buy it (and vice-versa). Those who own a system have exclusivity. System-maker has their money, they've helped mitigate the extra warehousing costs and people who want the system can purchase one off of the shelf. In 3 or 6 or 9 months, the price will drop and those people who previously couldn't afford the system will now be in price-range and we sell more systems without missed sales.
But now I'm being pedantic, this is economics 101!
Suffice to say that failure to provide enough systems at launch is truly a colossal failure. Nintendo's current advantage is their low price-point. PS3's current weakness is their high price-point. But if I can't buy either come November (b/c they're both sold out), then what's the difference? I'll just spend my x-mas money on something else and buy the Nintendo later (maybe next x-mas).
In the meanwhile though, I'm won't be buying high-margin accessories or games, I'll spend that money elsewhere. I'm not going to buy more games in July just to make up for the games I didn't buy in February (I already spent February's money)! So failure to provide me a system in November means lost potential sales until I do buy a system...
So how much did that warehousing cost?
From the Nintendo magazine link
When the X-box released before x-mas, they sold every single one. Heck, my little bro had his pre-paid at EB in November. We received it in February. If they're going to sell out, why don't they just make more before they start selling? MS doesn't make more money from people re-selling the unit on e-bay, but MS lost a lot of goodwill by failing to deliver a unit in reasonable time.
MS just became a running joke b/c so many people had ordered systems and not received them. I'm sure that this hurt them. I heard rumours of supply-chain issues and given ATI's own supply-chain problems, this may have been true. But, truth or no, it didn't get more systems in more houses, it actually gave potential buyers less exposure, b/c nobody had a system.
I would've bought an XBox 360 in December, I was hyped about them, the marketing blitz was on and I was keen on owning one. But hey, I couldn't buy one! My buddy with the 50" hi-def TV, he couldn't buy one! Nobody could buy one, so we all just moved on. I spent $600 playing Magic instead and now I still don't own a 360 (nor does my buddy :).
But now I hear that Nintendo will have only 6 million units at launch and it's like these marketing guys know something that we don't. I mean, at $250 each, they're going to sell out. And last I heard, sold out products meant lost potential profits! If people want my product and they can't buy it, then I'm giving them the opportunity to just spend their money elsewhere.
This Nintendo Wii is going to spread like wildfire. Casual gamers are going to come out of the cracks, people will marvel at the interactive gaming, just like people who stare at the DDR machines in the movie theatre arcades. But if I have to tell all of my jealous friends (& family) that they cannot have the instant gratification of owning their own system (b/c Nintendo didn't make enough systems) then they're going to move on the Next Big Thing.
Having a limited number of consoles makes the console a highly-valued item, it does not put more consoles in households, it does not increase the system's exposure, it does not sell more games, it just makes people angry that they can't own one of their own.
This is really the curse in software development: Management!
Programmers are not to blame for any of this cr*p. If a project is late, this is management's fault. If a project is buggy, this is management's fault. If a project is insecure, this is management's fault.
This whole concept of inept programmers cranking out big-bucks software (shrink-wrapped or custom-built) is just utter BS!
If the project spec calls for security, then my manager is responsible for ensuring that security is designed, implemented, tested and budgeted in the project plan. If programmers do not know how to implement secure code, then my manager's job is to fire that programmer, train that programmer or move that programmer elsewhere.
When a project has to choose between security and meeting a deadline, then this project was incorrectly planned. Now in management's defense, software planning is extremely difficult and requires all kinds of skills completely unrelated to the development work that got them promoted there in the first place. But hey, that's why they're paid the big bucks.
First off, the real issue here appears to be lack of CS and Math-related research-style positions.
A quick search of job boards will show you that nobody wants to hire entry-level computer programmers / network admins, so anyone quoting a lack of bodies is BSing you. We've discussed this issue on /. before now.
The author may think that he's hit on an issue, but his arguments seem specious and his research is very shallow.
From TA:
Specious #1: OK, first, if China AND India have ONLY 3x the # of grads, then the US is doing great! China AND India have 2.4 billion people, the US has 0.4 billion people. So the US has 2x as many engineering grads per capita. Why is this number cause for alarm?
Specious #2:What's more, this isn't really the issue anyways! Because your regular CS grads aren't doing "innovative, ground-breaking research", they're programming Database front-ends and administering networks. What you really want to know about are your Masters and PhD grads, but he fails to provide any relevant numbers for these.
My experience: I looked in to taking a Masters in 2004 at my Provincial University (~30k students). I wasn't eligible. I graduated with a 4-year Honours Co-op degree and a B to B+ average. It turns out that they were so flooded with students (mostly foreign) that the required average was now an A and they even closed the application period 3 months early. They were turning away some of their own grads.
So if we've run out of profs and we're turning away interested grads, does that still mean that we're behind? What's really the issue? I'd say it's money.
CS work is difficult. It requires years of study to be correctly proficient and continuous study thereafter. And to top it off, most IT workers are putting in massive overtime and are generally overworked (esp. the Network guys). So IT workers want to be well-paid; but nobody wants to pay for this work!
General programming work is quite expensive and the ROI is usually long if there is one (some software projects have no ROI, they just need to be done). Software itself is expensive to create and productivity of staff varies wildly b/c the learning curve can be very steep. Nobody wants inexperienced IT staff, so IT workers want to be well-paid.
To make this even more expensive, computer programmers in the US are bringing in Internationally exorbitant rates (one IBM programmer for $125/hour or a 25-man team from India?)
So at the end of the day, where do you put the CS PhDs? Where are they going to work? What are you going to pay them? Of course if companies won't afford CS Bachelors what is the industry for CS PhDs? How many CS PhDs do we really need? Wouldn't we rather have the best brains go into Med studies (seems we're always at a Doctor shortage here in Canada)?
(Please if you have answers, I'd like to hear them, these are not meant to be rhetorical questions)
It used to be that Universities were one of the few spots with e-mail access. E-mail was practically a perk. This is no longer the case. Universities need to spend money on staff e-mail accounts, but spending money on managing thousands of student accounts is really pointless. E-mail is freely available to anyone with a Net connection. It seems to make more sense to let MS run the e-mail server (and the spam filter and the mess of other pieces) for the students. Now we can pay a little bit of money and provide the ad-free e-mail as a service. Most University usage policies are so limited that my University account is just another account to manage. As long as students are not required to use the MS e-mail, then the system is pretty fair. As for the CS department... they'll always have their own gear anyways. So the picky CS students can bug their own department for special privileges. Of course, this could be totally side-stepped by implementing a system like WebCT and requiring that all Staff *actually use* the system. If this is the case, then you don't need e-mail to talk to the prof or your classmates, just leave an online message for them: Problem Solved!
Let's face it, IT's job is to put people out of work, or to reduce the skill level required to do a job. If we're good at it, we can also put ourselves out of work.
This means a few things:
These things are not true with many other industries. Backhoe operators don't remove other people's jobs. Civil engineers don't cause construction workers to lose jobs. And neither of these groups are doubling their efficiency every 18 months :)
Reasons IT will suffer:
If the average joe does not understand IT complexity, then they don't understand our billing rates and cannot justify our training and salary. IT is still fighting the concepts that software is cheap to make and hardware is cheap to buy and maintain. Clearly, we know that this is not the case.
The Solution:
MCSD.NET != P.Eng.
We need a Professional Software Engineer (or equivalent) designation to even begin the process of justifying our "exhorbitant" salaries and to bring to light the understanding of IT's inherent complexities.
If we are viewed as mechanics, then people will pay us as mechanics. If we are viewed as Engineers (and can deliver as such), then people will pay us as Engineers. MS, Sun and RedHat certs. are only part of the picture, we need a self-governing body like engineers, accountants, doctors and lawyers or we will simply become greaseless mechanics and painters that never get dirty. And we don't get respect for that type of labour.