It is the money stupid (why digital versions cost almost the same as paper ones?).
It is the comfy factor stupid - I use what I find more comortable - it is paper mostly and for technical specs and Guttenberg project books I use tablet. Yet I do not use it for social media or anything that requires input - any type of such device sucks big time at inputting. Go to hell if you cannot see that.
It is the DRM stupid - book bought for almost the same price I can give away or borrow to my friends and family - it is technically easy to do and I am not becoming a criminal in a process.
So yes I use tablet and my laptop to read stuff. I have purchased one e-book and I decided this to be the last one when I could not use it after moving to another PC. Fuck you and your new shiny tools that are mostly useless and build new barriers which took our society years to overcome. New tools - splendid idea. Make them useful and comfortable to use and if you give me only a license for my money then make the amount less than it is for the same book. Other than that go fuck yourself in your knee.
This said I understand that my view is simplistic and I will have to follow the crowd of mostly morons some day because paper copies will disappear. Till that day either your give me what I want or I am not your customer. You may think that my rage is unjustified but I am sick and tired of people telling me what is best for me w/o even asking ME what I think is.
From market share etc perspective it is all as you say or it looks like if you do not look too close at corporate world. I guess Still I do not see the point to pay for application that are free on desktop, I do not see the point of struggling when typing shit in and I am also fed up with the "corroded" micro-usb problems which some of these devices have. You really have a dichotomy here: for professional purposes you usually need something more or some serious tuning at least. For general public that struggled with common purpose PC anyway the deficits are not visible really but benefits like mobility are. I think that explains this. What this means for me and GP is I suppose we will wait for m$ to clean this shitty market and then I'd consider buying a tablet again (maybe). Please not that that the last sentence comes from a unix guy - I worked almost whole professional life on unix machines using windows only as terminals if at all. Bitter is it not?
'tis all depends - we are resources for them as the company indeed is a means of providing profit for its owner(s) at least in normal cases.
This said if company interest in particular area goes beyond next quarter then you may argue if they are able for recognizing self interest theys hould be dealing with you in a professional manner and this includes all the niceties as well as reasonable transparency etc. If that does not happen the company may be falling apart internally because folk on the floor is busy coursing management as well as looking for another job instead of looking at the benefits they can provide for the company with their work and cooperation. So if you take it really on economical level it shows that if company has plans to be there next year maybe they should be investing some into way the interfaces towards the floor folk work. Usually however the shit comes from above in literal way: HR behave like a bunch of assholes because they are treated like a bunch of assholes by their supervisors etc.
This money that we spend on searching aliens is of course a waste. The same can be said about almost anything except food and medicine all the rest is not really needed for survival of our species. This is one thing. The other is - once we stop spending money on such wasteful things like this (or other) program we waste it another way by sending troops somewhere or some such silly thing. But in general you are right - searching for aliens is futile.
this is true also when you look from management perspective - overoptimised organisation is not capable to adapt to change in environment because it can only do what it does well. This said - not all of optimizing is bad. Companies grow fat and this fat need to be cut somehow from time to time. I have been working motly in big corporations and there is another thing that they do not have - easy way to change. In fact in some situations it was easier to fire the whole dep and hire a new (usually but not always smaller) one to be able to do things differently. What I want to say is that it is not always doom and gloom - sometimes the corporation can reinvent itself again and again. It is difficult and painful but it happens.
so you neither you read the article nor you can draw conclusions - must belong to tea party or what? The state (or emperor) taxes people not because it is morally good or bad or it is such a big fun. Taxes are collected for two reasons: keep the state running i.e. have those corner stones of civilization like justice system, police, army, administration needed to govern that etc as well as to spend it on things that whoever has the power thinks is good. This may include the circus or some other policy - i.e. effectively redistributing the wealth. Now the way the wealth is redistributed, who gets it and who pays for it is a matter of applicable laws and decisions that folks in a given country have to come to agreement for - for this a certain amount of social cohesion is needed or appropriate oppression apparatus as well as indoctrination in schools ('free market fixes all' is not much different from 'Kim was the greatest leader' in that it is not really true) - this is in fact redistribution already as in an ideal state police and justice system do not need oppress people into anything so one may argue having institutions like say DEA is just as much about redistribution (of money and power) as in case of public schools etc. Once we understand that we can start thinking about two other things: what we want to support with our taxes including prioritizing of targets etc and how we are going to fund those targets with tax. If one find out that money kept in bank is to be taxed because it benefits the society in which banks operate then so be it and we should only hope that decisions like this are based on merit not on basis of wishful thinking and political indoctrination and they get modified if found not working or being inefficient in that what they do. OC reality is different I know but that is ideal to fight for.
for this reasoning to reflect reality not only the 'rich' would have to invest so that benefit the country they get a tax cut in which does not seem the case - they invest globally and they invest in a way that is tax optimized. This is of course assuming that comparison of consumption v. investment is done on base of how it merits local economy and local population which is also not true - the actual reason why some say so is probably abduction by aliens because I cannot understand how they come to the conclusions that are either neutral or harmful to them while being also a fantasy.
that is not the way groups of humans live/behave/work and group of developers is a group of humans also when they do not like to see it that way. In any group of humans that do something together there is a leader or a group of leaders (as in diarchy in ancient Greece&Rome etc). The way they are chosen i.e. formally or by accident or it just happened that way as in case of Linux & Mr. Torvalds matters much less than how effective the organisation works with them i.e. it is not only quality of the leader(s) but also quality of teams. In small groups leadership tends to be less distinguished but the 'one sticks out' situation starts to be visible when 3 persons work together. IT may be that leader of a group does not want to be as visible and this works well anyway but if you have a group a communication towards the group usually ends up as directed towards few individuals instead of a whole group. Sometimes a group takes a conscious efforts to be uniform instead of structured but it ends up with some gurus having more say than others.
It is interesting to see how communes and kibutzes worked - majority fell on the idea that all are equal and there are no leaders - this works only if you have highly motivated and befriended people that know what needs be done. In any other case a resulting chaos and supporting laziness make such organisation fail terribly. That is experience I have made over last 30 years of work.
How true. I have one comment though:. you say that "pragmatism > idealism" and that it is then sort of bad. That is not entirely true, neither it matters that much. Pragmatism may mean for instance that because you value your own time and want to avoid waste in the future you actually care for structured, well commented code (whichever way it is done). What I wanted to say is that it is not pragmatism that stands in the way but idiocy. I would even go as far as to say that idealism is bad for developing working but also well structured and documented code because idealists do not like to cope with a reality and this means that instead of taking measures that help produce code that is readable and working they tend to do fancy things that do not put things forward forcing others to cut corners because they had to wait and ended up short on time etc. To say it differently: it is not very pragmatic to say: "code whatever important that it compiles" - you pay the price eventually also when you do not notice (because you have no direct comparison).
I agree because I have no patience for converting pdf shitillion times before I can read it on kindle (yea you can do it 'simply' they say.....) and any such nonsense - I expect things to work w/o need for fiddling with them. Even at work where I often use open source I am appalled by the quality and incompatibility and need to fiddle with each of the tools I use but that is work and they pay me so I do not care - privately I do as you do.
For the disagreement: I do not trust the googles and apples to keep my data securely. I have to trust somebody but I do not trust big ones because they save all the titles of pr0n I ever watched on their sites to sell it to somebody who is going to use it against me one day. The private information has always been this way and it is going to stay this way. The exhibitionists, perverts and other brain damaged indihviduals including you may trust them I do not and this is a serious problem if you are forced (yes we are that far) to use certain services. On top of it the majority of the services you get are not exactly what I want even if I pay for them which is a serious nuisance. Now you may say I am (almost) alone but there are plenty of people like me even if majority does not even know better.
You dismiss the right of sizable minority to do as they please because you are just satisfied and to add insult to injury you claim that they have no rights because there are only few of them a claim that you did not even bother to prove. How nice of you. So looking at it from broader perspective - even if I agree with you some my disagreement is on the principle - so I'd say fuck you Sir!
this is correct. At my engineering course we had a course on reliability of complex systems - this is pretty fascinating stuff by the way - using the same batch increases the risk in case of systematic failure i.e. something is built in incorrectly and has to fail in certain conditions which if they occur may cause all drives of the same batch to fail the same way thus landing you directly a massive problem instead of smaller one. This can be mitigated too - such systemic failures have also probabilities etc but the simples is to mix the devices from different batches if possible. The question about paranoia is difficult to answer - if your data is so precious you will have also backups as a secondary line of defense (first being your raid) but to have high availability you may want to remove/decrease the need to use backups too so mixing batches even if increases work load may be a good solution not a result of a paranoia. In electrical engineering and I am pretty sure any other type but IT (which somehow avoid being engineering and is science or craft somehow???) reliability calculations are made routinely and used to decrease not only cost of failure but also production. I still remember what they taught us on first hour of the course - how to produce torpedoes cheaply while ensuring that they still reach the target - you have to multiply systems but there is no need for any of them to be durable the way say turbine in an airplane engine must be - they must just work for the amount of time they are used an not much longer - to calculate this quite some knowledge empirical as well es theoretical is needed, and how you go about things that you build once only and you cannot use probes of a batch to determine the probability. Fascinating.
they should be hanged by the balls these criminals of yours. I hope jerking off is also a criminal act and police in the land of the free does something to combat this evil activity.
it is getting usually worse when you criminalize prostitution. To help those involved you can do a lots of other things than destroying lives of otherwise good citizens. I suppose comparing your victimized prostitutes with the lady in question is not really that good either....
Paid sex as long as it is consensual, does not harm anybody and should not interest anybody except parties taken part in it (and possibly IRS). How come you see no difference between that and murder is beyond me. It is frankly quite disturbing.
of course you are right. There is not one single bible even today as the gathering of books that bible is looks differently depending on for which version of Christianity the book was prepared. Even if you take the book catholics use now it is still a compendium that at some point has been accepted as a 'proper' version so that unified book can be promoted and used. This process of unification involved removal of some texts. There have also been different translations. All this means that the book albeit for some holy is just some sort of base for those that consider it a book of truths. IN reality all big religions have this problem that their canon has been changed over time. Some ignore this, some use this fact as a reason to dismiss the whole thing as a valid source of anything and for some it is just a good hint pointing them in the some direction. I guess Einstein was in the 3rd group also when he did not follow the direction as considered the whole book of christianity as a set of rather primitive stories. I guess one thing that we usually miss on this is that majority of humans living so far have been primitive in this respect independently what religion or not they committed themselves to.
What does being good actually mean? How does helping others become universally good? I am asking because you used word logic which to me means you have some nice definitions and better view on which basis you build your world view of among others god's existence or lack thereof. This is not even touching the subject of people being good sometimes but generally being assholes - how does that fit?
I find discussion on/. (and other internet fora) on any subject related to religion, (none) existence of god and such rather silly if sometimes entertaining. They inevitable end up in rants. I guess that is so because the subjects require quite some power in the brain that majority of participants in such discussions do not have. They also require quite some foundations - starting on definitions of good/ness, what religion is, sense of having organized religions or religious organisations and relationship between belief or believes, the origins of virtues in context of complex structures our societies became and existence or not of god(s). All this are interesting subjects that you can spend a lot of time analyzing and discussing by which I mean exchange of ideas allowing determination of truth not annihilation of the opponent which fun as it may be is not furthering our understanding of reality.
And if you shout symbianis dying and then kill it then it will die. Nokias's problems were not symbian but the way they worked or organized their teams. Autark teams where everybody can do anything (but does not) made efficiencies of scale imposible. Top it with CEO telling everybody our produts have no future' and you wonder why their credit lines are still open. I think it is difficult to destroy company fast but management of Nokia is doing quite nicely. In corporation I work for we took working frameworks Nokia used so successfully and guess what - our products start to fail. I guess we did not copy their good practices well enuff thou because we do not fail as fast - maybe we need more gurus?
the problem you describe is real but does not apply to all environments and application types. The web application i.e. single target (or cloudy crowd of clones) has different characteristics still if you release few times a day then your web page is not good enuff.
Somewhere above somebody claimed FB is doing it every day and that is a sign it is possible and good - well I dare say FB web page is one of the worst web.2.0 pages I have misfortune to 'enjoy'. Maybe their back-end is good maybe not I do not care because front end is crap - maybe they do not release fast enuff. Then again this is a single target i.e. they do not have to deliver to many customers, different configurations, ensure no interruptions during roll-out test roll-out and roll-back and all other things that you cannot always automate. This is of course not to say that it is impossible and not feasible. It is but not always or even usually not. That is my vies. ymmv and agile gurus know better anyway (but have not even tried to understand what the hell the word means).
Well it all depends. There are systems complex enuff and important enuff that need to have stability tests that run longer and are more complex than automated run attached to automated builds can do. This means they are decoupled from nightly builds. This also means that you cannot have full test for each nightly build and this affects of course release pace. OTOH if you work on maintenance branch you do not usually do whole stability tests which is justified by the size of the patch/set of patches you are releasing so your pace may be faster here. This said there are for sure systems where this much tedious testing is not needed and which are less complicated (one standard release no market releases, no market configuration branches etc) so you release one application with a basic set of configs - this is easy then and I guess you can just make your master branch available to customers to pick it this making the release cycle very short (say week or two). I do not think any serous software can be released more often unless you release internally to your back-end server. But even there I cannot imagine few releases a day as productive and sensible.
BTW: I work in the industry for quite a while and I have not seen one organisation that actually worked water fall. They did some silly planning sessions for projects predicting how many lines of code you may be writting 2 years ahead but actual design and test was done in iterative way which is as efficient as agile methodologies (ooops sorry I should have said frameworks) if not more efficient (in terms of combined quality, usability, project scope and time needed).
Slashdot Mirror
It is the comfy factor stupid - I use what I find more comortable - it is paper mostly and for technical specs and Guttenberg project books I use tablet. Yet I do not use it for social media or anything that requires input - any type of such device sucks big time at inputting. Go to hell if you cannot see that.
It is the DRM stupid - book bought for almost the same price I can give away or borrow to my friends and family - it is technically easy to do and I am not becoming a criminal in a process.
So yes I use tablet and my laptop to read stuff. I have purchased one e-book and I decided this to be the last one when I could not use it after moving to another PC. Fuck you and your new shiny tools that are mostly useless and build new barriers which took our society years to overcome. New tools - splendid idea. Make them useful and comfortable to use and if you give me only a license for my money then make the amount less than it is for the same book. Other than that go fuck yourself in your knee.
This said I understand that my view is simplistic and I will have to follow the crowd of mostly morons some day because paper copies will disappear. Till that day either your give me what I want or I am not your customer. You may think that my rage is unjustified but I am sick and tired of people telling me what is best for me w/o even asking ME what I think is.
You mean some of the girls I meet on internet are guys?
From market share etc perspective it is all as you say or it looks like if you do not look too close at corporate world. I guess Still I do not see the point to pay for application that are free on desktop, I do not see the point of struggling when typing shit in and I am also fed up with the "corroded" micro-usb problems which some of these devices have. You really have a dichotomy here: for professional purposes you usually need something more or some serious tuning at least. For general public that struggled with common purpose PC anyway the deficits are not visible really but benefits like mobility are. I think that explains this. What this means for me and GP is I suppose we will wait for m$ to clean this shitty market and then I'd consider buying a tablet again (maybe). Please not that that the last sentence comes from a unix guy - I worked almost whole professional life on unix machines using windows only as terminals if at all. Bitter is it not?
I for one welcome our new GM Salmon Overlords
important is that the well does not have round corners so apple cannot sue.
'tis all depends - we are resources for them as the company indeed is a means of providing profit for its owner(s) at least in normal cases. This said if company interest in particular area goes beyond next quarter then you may argue if they are able for recognizing self interest theys hould be dealing with you in a professional manner and this includes all the niceties as well as reasonable transparency etc. If that does not happen the company may be falling apart internally because folk on the floor is busy coursing management as well as looking for another job instead of looking at the benefits they can provide for the company with their work and cooperation. So if you take it really on economical level it shows that if company has plans to be there next year maybe they should be investing some into way the interfaces towards the floor folk work. Usually however the shit comes from above in literal way: HR behave like a bunch of assholes because they are treated like a bunch of assholes by their supervisors etc.
This money that we spend on searching aliens is of course a waste. The same can be said about almost anything except food and medicine all the rest is not really needed for survival of our species. This is one thing. The other is - once we stop spending money on such wasteful things like this (or other) program we waste it another way by sending troops somewhere or some such silly thing. But in general you are right - searching for aliens is futile.
this is true also when you look from management perspective - overoptimised organisation is not capable to adapt to change in environment because it can only do what it does well. This said - not all of optimizing is bad. Companies grow fat and this fat need to be cut somehow from time to time. I have been working motly in big corporations and there is another thing that they do not have - easy way to change. In fact in some situations it was easier to fire the whole dep and hire a new (usually but not always smaller) one to be able to do things differently. What I want to say is that it is not always doom and gloom - sometimes the corporation can reinvent itself again and again. It is difficult and painful but it happens.
so you neither you read the article nor you can draw conclusions - must belong to tea party or what? The state (or emperor) taxes people not because it is morally good or bad or it is such a big fun. Taxes are collected for two reasons: keep the state running i.e. have those corner stones of civilization like justice system, police, army, administration needed to govern that etc as well as to spend it on things that whoever has the power thinks is good. This may include the circus or some other policy - i.e. effectively redistributing the wealth. Now the way the wealth is redistributed, who gets it and who pays for it is a matter of applicable laws and decisions that folks in a given country have to come to agreement for - for this a certain amount of social cohesion is needed or appropriate oppression apparatus as well as indoctrination in schools ('free market fixes all' is not much different from 'Kim was the greatest leader' in that it is not really true) - this is in fact redistribution already as in an ideal state police and justice system do not need oppress people into anything so one may argue having institutions like say DEA is just as much about redistribution (of money and power) as in case of public schools etc. Once we understand that we can start thinking about two other things: what we want to support with our taxes including prioritizing of targets etc and how we are going to fund those targets with tax. If one find out that money kept in bank is to be taxed because it benefits the society in which banks operate then so be it and we should only hope that decisions like this are based on merit not on basis of wishful thinking and political indoctrination and they get modified if found not working or being inefficient in that what they do. OC reality is different I know but that is ideal to fight for.
I also think that GOP still has something to learn - the great teacher knew how to solve the problem of faulty statistics
It is interesting to see how communes and kibutzes worked - majority fell on the idea that all are equal and there are no leaders - this works only if you have highly motivated and befriended people that know what needs be done. In any other case a resulting chaos and supporting laziness make such organisation fail terribly. That is experience I have made over last 30 years of work.
good flame congratulations!
How true. I have one comment though:. you say that "pragmatism > idealism" and that it is then sort of bad. That is not entirely true, neither it matters that much. Pragmatism may mean for instance that because you value your own time and want to avoid waste in the future you actually care for structured, well commented code (whichever way it is done). What I wanted to say is that it is not pragmatism that stands in the way but idiocy. I would even go as far as to say that idealism is bad for developing working but also well structured and documented code because idealists do not like to cope with a reality and this means that instead of taking measures that help produce code that is readable and working they tend to do fancy things that do not put things forward forcing others to cut corners because they had to wait and ended up short on time etc. To say it differently: it is not very pragmatic to say: "code whatever important that it compiles" - you pay the price eventually also when you do not notice (because you have no direct comparison).
I agree because I have no patience for converting pdf shitillion times before I can read it on kindle (yea you can do it 'simply' they say.....) and any such nonsense - I expect things to work w/o need for fiddling with them. Even at work where I often use open source I am appalled by the quality and incompatibility and need to fiddle with each of the tools I use but that is work and they pay me so I do not care - privately I do as you do. For the disagreement: I do not trust the googles and apples to keep my data securely. I have to trust somebody but I do not trust big ones because they save all the titles of pr0n I ever watched on their sites to sell it to somebody who is going to use it against me one day. The private information has always been this way and it is going to stay this way. The exhibitionists, perverts and other brain damaged indihviduals including you may trust them I do not and this is a serious problem if you are forced (yes we are that far) to use certain services. On top of it the majority of the services you get are not exactly what I want even if I pay for them which is a serious nuisance. Now you may say I am (almost) alone but there are plenty of people like me even if majority does not even know better.
You dismiss the right of sizable minority to do as they please because you are just satisfied and to add insult to injury you claim that they have no rights because there are only few of them a claim that you did not even bother to prove. How nice of you. So looking at it from broader perspective - even if I agree with you some my disagreement is on the principle - so I'd say fuck you Sir!
I suppose your statistic can be right especially if you count car bombs as traffic accidents.
this is correct. At my engineering course we had a course on reliability of complex systems - this is pretty fascinating stuff by the way - using the same batch increases the risk in case of systematic failure i.e. something is built in incorrectly and has to fail in certain conditions which if they occur may cause all drives of the same batch to fail the same way thus landing you directly a massive problem instead of smaller one. This can be mitigated too - such systemic failures have also probabilities etc but the simples is to mix the devices from different batches if possible. The question about paranoia is difficult to answer - if your data is so precious you will have also backups as a secondary line of defense (first being your raid) but to have high availability you may want to remove/decrease the need to use backups too so mixing batches even if increases work load may be a good solution not a result of a paranoia. In electrical engineering and I am pretty sure any other type but IT (which somehow avoid being engineering and is science or craft somehow???) reliability calculations are made routinely and used to decrease not only cost of failure but also production. I still remember what they taught us on first hour of the course - how to produce torpedoes cheaply while ensuring that they still reach the target - you have to multiply systems but there is no need for any of them to be durable the way say turbine in an airplane engine must be - they must just work for the amount of time they are used an not much longer - to calculate this quite some knowledge empirical as well es theoretical is needed, and how you go about things that you build once only and you cannot use probes of a batch to determine the probability. Fascinating.
they should be hanged by the balls these criminals of yours. I hope jerking off is also a criminal act and police in the land of the free does something to combat this evil activity.
it is getting usually worse when you criminalize prostitution. To help those involved you can do a lots of other things than destroying lives of otherwise good citizens. I suppose comparing your victimized prostitutes with the lady in question is not really that good either....
Paid sex as long as it is consensual, does not harm anybody and should not interest anybody except parties taken part in it (and possibly IRS). How come you see no difference between that and murder is beyond me. It is frankly quite disturbing.
of course you are right. There is not one single bible even today as the gathering of books that bible is looks differently depending on for which version of Christianity the book was prepared. Even if you take the book catholics use now it is still a compendium that at some point has been accepted as a 'proper' version so that unified book can be promoted and used. This process of unification involved removal of some texts. There have also been different translations. All this means that the book albeit for some holy is just some sort of base for those that consider it a book of truths. IN reality all big religions have this problem that their canon has been changed over time. Some ignore this, some use this fact as a reason to dismiss the whole thing as a valid source of anything and for some it is just a good hint pointing them in the some direction. I guess Einstein was in the 3rd group also when he did not follow the direction as considered the whole book of christianity as a set of rather primitive stories. I guess one thing that we usually miss on this is that majority of humans living so far have been primitive in this respect independently what religion or not they committed themselves to.
I find discussion on /. (and other internet fora) on any subject related to religion, (none) existence of god and such rather silly if sometimes entertaining. They inevitable end up in rants. I guess that is so because the subjects require quite some power in the brain that majority of participants in such discussions do not have. They also require quite some foundations - starting on definitions of good/ness, what religion is, sense of having organized religions or religious organisations and relationship between belief or believes, the origins of virtues in context of complex structures our societies became and existence or not of god(s). All this are interesting subjects that you can spend a lot of time analyzing and discussing by which I mean exchange of ideas allowing determination of truth not annihilation of the opponent which fun as it may be is not furthering our understanding of reality.
And if you shout symbianis dying and then kill it then it will die. Nokias's problems were not symbian but the way they worked or organized their teams. Autark teams where everybody can do anything (but does not) made efficiencies of scale imposible. Top it with CEO telling everybody our produts have no future' and you wonder why their credit lines are still open. I think it is difficult to destroy company fast but management of Nokia is doing quite nicely. In corporation I work for we took working frameworks Nokia used so successfully and guess what - our products start to fail. I guess we did not copy their good practices well enuff thou because we do not fail as fast - maybe we need more gurus?
Somewhere above somebody claimed FB is doing it every day and that is a sign it is possible and good - well I dare say FB web page is one of the worst web.2.0 pages I have misfortune to 'enjoy'. Maybe their back-end is good maybe not I do not care because front end is crap - maybe they do not release fast enuff. Then again this is a single target i.e. they do not have to deliver to many customers, different configurations, ensure no interruptions during roll-out test roll-out and roll-back and all other things that you cannot always automate. This is of course not to say that it is impossible and not feasible. It is but not always or even usually not. That is my vies. ymmv and agile gurus know better anyway (but have not even tried to understand what the hell the word means).
BTW: I work in the industry for quite a while and I have not seen one organisation that actually worked water fall. They did some silly planning sessions for projects predicting how many lines of code you may be writting 2 years ahead but actual design and test was done in iterative way which is as efficient as agile methodologies (ooops sorry I should have said frameworks) if not more efficient (in terms of combined quality, usability, project scope and time needed).
I believe in US this is called Lawful Interception.