you of course have a point but I have seen enough of managers whose eyes went glassy before the first sentence of the explanation has even been completed. It is difficult to explain things to people who are managers either because they were technically incompetent, too agressive to work in a team or jump to frequently between companies to have any idea what the one in which they work currently actually does. Obviously the MBA courses consider the actual work beyond financial success as an uniform mass that can be sliced, transported etc without any difference on the end product - something that is evidently not correct albeit this may be avoiding perception as it is difficult to see things clearly in ever changing world of saving cuts, bonuses that they induce and position hops (made to avoid consequences).
I was on the other side of the divide than you number of times and I must say I can understand the trade-offs well enough for an idiot techie. I have great doubts that this is the same on your time of the divide though.
I make it simple for you as you are obviously on the other side. There are basically 3 basic ways to save money while doing a project and consequently 4 different decisions you can make:
not doing a project at all. In absolute terms it is a bummer - no costs! It has a disadvantage of not having a product at the end
doing the project good enough for a management i.e. saving too much to have a working product. The good thing is you have a product. Bad that you do not have a product for which you can honestly claim any money.
doing the project good enough for both sides of the divide i.e. techie and manager idiots. This is as said good enough on the level all others deliver.
doing the project well. This has disadvantage of being costly but may have an advantage of being possible to ask for a premium for a good product.Another advantage is for projects to come so in simplistic vision visible for a simpletons that make decisions usually not visible at all: design base is good so you save on design costs.
OC last option does not work on a market where nobody is willing to pay that premium and where consequently there is nobody delivering this better quality so nobody even knows that one can do better. That is especially true in situations where customer does not care as long as the product KOW (kind of works) and its inadequacies and suffering they cause is by somebody else while at the same time barrier to entry is high enough to prevent real competition. What is really appalling is that people do not understand consequences of their actions choosing suboptimal but cheap product and wondering why it does not work.
Bottom line is a definition of where the point of 'good enough' is - neither financial nor technical expertise only are sufficient to make a good decision, consequences are usually hanging on techie necks after bonies have been consumed by managers though. Justification for direct action at least in some cases one may think.
It is your choice and must stay private matter. OC I know that companies exist that look for jerks without private life because they are cheaper and easier to control (well up to the point where they go bananas of course). How a company can be interested in a simpletons that have no other faculties that churning out code??? Well they can and they do but that does not mean we have to comply with their silly requests. You can if that makes you happy. Most of the time I do not. I have however colleagues that do at least if the company does not give them so much to do that they do not have free time except for the amount spend on commuting & sleeping. They also have no families and no almost no hobbies to speak of. I guess when their company finds out that an engineer in Zamunda is cheaper than he is then he will be laid off. I would be too when they look at me. The difference is that I will have the family to keep my self esteem (or part of it) upright.
Well of course that is your choice and if it is making you happy then that is OK. Having this as a requirement for a prospective employee is just silly but I took notice and put it in my CV.
The things that you do off working hours is your and only your private matter. Whether that is programming or something else is strictly private. OC we put some of it into our CVs but that does not mean that we are obliged to code after hours unless we are paid for this and even then there are limits to that.
I wonder how matters that belong to private life of an employee is a matter of interest for the company unless these activities are illegal in which case it is a case for justice department not for a company. In other words: I CAN share my hobbies and interests with the company but I DO NOT HAVE TO. I am however not surprised by the way the shear possibility that somebody may have a private life can lead to bulling attempts. Fascinating.
well this may be but it may also be that people got building permission to build in normally dried river beds and when the big rain came then water did not have any place to go but raised above the level it would normally raise to which means morons that build in the river plains and river beds as in Istambul should be held accountable for what they did.
why is this that fellow that is responsible for getting the records - this was obviously not his goal and if he is charged for it then it is just laughable. OTOH he is responsible for attempting to invade his Ex's privacy and that is serious enough to get some sort of punishment but why is the hospital getting the money - they are guilty of criminal negligence in handling patients' data so they should be paying not getting paid.
to me it looks like one more example of justice system malfunctioning. It is not a great malfunction but shows that punishment and the crime are matched not by the facts but by the random acts of gov. officials. Was it not something that american constitution tried to prevent?
GP assumes too much I think. The prices on fragmented and assward mobile markets (like in US and to some extent EU) do not compare to what people in Japan experience. Most likely the japanese boys and girls would not have noticed a difference (except maybe that some music would not play). This of course does not make the bandwidth stealing in any way correct and the whole process good. That the whole thing is unethical and wrong will not stop anybody of course.
Justice Bradley said it in 1882 apparently. I think considering that this was an issue so long time ago that we can give up the hope, rest our arguments and do something productive instead of continuing these discussions. They are not bringing any fruit as the ears that ought to listen them are not so the discussions become increasingly group wanking sessions.
For those that still do not want to give up the fight read this.
This is of course not to say that negative result of a search is something to snare upon as it provided some certainty instead of hope only but how serious these bugs were and why we have not seen much slipping trough these bug catching parties as it could be expected from any software enterprise? I mean there is no ideal tester so something gets always true.
I do not live in US and I could not care less but here it says that the public prosecutor can chose whether federal or state law applies and that under the first it can even confiscate property used for drugs production even if owners did not know about such activity taking place. This looked odd to me that such practice could be possible but that does not surprised me at all - I know it from my country that drug laws are strange.
at least we still have a chance for survival although gathering berries or hunting a steak in the darkness might be a challenge as would be distinguishing poisonous from non-poisonous fungi etc so food maybe a problem if they are send to eliminate us (by mistake or intentionally).
We are of course not that far yet but we are already on a path possibly leading us into problems. The question is whether we survive if we are confronted with 'mechanical life' if you will. Funny how Hollywood in its silliness and superficiality always wants us be eliminated by superior race (of machines or aliens) that has complex intelligence (or at least reminds us in some sense which of course is not intelligent then) whereas you do not have to be very smart to eliminate us.
This reminds me of a novel: "Invincible" by Master Stanislaw. He published it first time in 1964. A prophet you might say.
have you attended the course you would have known that it is not coding methodology. The course that my company sent me to was about managing the projects and the world methodology was forbidden by the course's chief master boss. I must admit that parts of it were very interesting and partially confirming what I have learned with my own sweat, there was a lot of project management techniques that I should have known before but never had time to learn, a lot of ways how to work in a team etc. There were also examples of big companies that use the scrum way. I personally think that it works as presented only in env where intelligent, skilled, knowledgeable and well meaning people work, it will not work where problems already arrive at basic definitions of even at command of used language.
OTOH the actual scrum in essence is just the time boxes, sprints, backlogs, scrum masters and all this such. Whether this is better than properly organized project I do not know but to me it looks like a production line and that is I met once in my life and I hated it so much that this was a huge motivation to finish university and become an engineer instead of production line worker. OC this is all sold to us as empowering, self-organizing etc but reality is that this is just another way of put a whip to developer's arse. They also spice it all up with some religious like zeal which I dislike.
Bottom line is that there is no silver bullet and companies that believe in it are just wasting the money (avoiding waste is one of scrum principles apparently). What the actual engineers do is to do their work despite efforts of management to screw (scrum???) it.
Funny part of the training was when the trainer mentioned the companies where he introduced scrum before. One of them was our competitor that collapsed AFTER scrum was introduced there.
as for statistics - I heard on the radio the other day that police officers union here (Germany) issued a report on the issue. Apparently they claim that there is restrictions do not do any good. They admit however that among young skewed shooters and murderers in Germany in recent years majority if not all played violent guys and did it to such extent that they apparently lost it.
I guess there is no easy way and the only thing simple prohibition is likely to achieve is black market and the best prevention is close community bonds that allow to see it coming early enough.
that sounds so familiar. We have fault reporting system here. Original was done on mainframe and was working well. Then they webized the interface but it was still working as mainframe did the DB crunching. Then 'suddenly' y2k came and they threw away the mainframe. The webized solution was scrapped off of all non-essential features and was wobbling around for a while until few years later they announced the new shiny version of it with 'new' features (some of them scrapped before). The only difference in these 'new' features comparing to old ones is that they 'improved' them so that now we have to work around them because they malfunction so badly.
there are ways to get them thee too. The solutions that are needed are most likely not simple and would require legal tools as well as technology but most important thing is that the money is paid by somebody. It is enough that you go after people that pay for ads put in spam mail, intimidate their business and huge part of funding will cease of exist and for the rest it may be just to expensive to hire good programmers to get the botnets to send the spam in the first place.
In other words that there is no absolute protection against car theft does not mean that you do not have to lock your vehicle when you leave it in the parking lot. methinks.
goto is just a tool, it is a soft brain that kills.
I see no problem with GOTs as long as they are used properly. The reason why their use should be restricted is that brainless people left with the choice:
use goto when necessary
use other ways available in your l. of choice if possible and feasible
combine the two and use GOTO and other programming methods without thinking producing structureless bulk of code. Resulting monstrous spaghetti like thing may function sometimes but becomes a hell of a trap when used as code base for next design. This 'sometimes' working part is also interesting albeit today this is not of so much concern as people are used to crappy software by now.
You are not looking far enuff. For instance why not having two sets - one for wify one for girlfriend? If one grows such additional organ on one's knee it would t hen give quite new meaning to the phrase" f.k yourself in knee'.
assume it works for us i.e. customers then soon airlines will have a look at it too to predict and prevent? What happens when they try to alter the future that has already been predicted - crash of worlds or something. Fascinating anyway. Especially reading TFA is like learning a new foreign language (except LISP that is)
It would be refreshing if the matters of god and/or deity were dealt with by people of Kant's, Descartes' et al stature and capability as instead of putting argument forward to find out the truth they argue to win because they believe (this in a sense that they believe god exists or they believe god does not exist) but that is I guess too much to ask for so we have this constant bubbling about the subject that is not bringing anything except exitment (or at least for some it does). I do not mean PP but the discussion which in any way reach beliefs. It seems our brains are designed this way so that we believe, What we believe in is irrelevant as long as we have a herd to which we can belong.
I am just wondering how silly and meritless people's beliefs are. In US a common belief is that state should not do anything except granting you a a gun and forbidding smoking pot. No amount of arguments will convince a big minority or possibly small majority that state organized institutions may be good. In Germany there is no way you can touch silly rules that have word 'social' in the name because you are a right wing radical then. Both appoaches prevent use of market forces and state power where those are the best:
state in regulating market so that it provides services for the people on affordable cost. Services like health care especially where prospective customers are usually badly informed, have no choice and are usually under heavy pressure to act - illnesses like cancer and others kinda make you accept what doctors say even if you have doubts because alternative is what exactly is there an alternative?
market in provided services at best cost, provided framework is established by somebody powerful (state).
There are issues where state has to accept responsibility. Usually they have to do wih so called natural monopoles. It does not mean that the state has to do things - usually it can issue licenses and support the poor if they cannot afford service deemed needed for the whole public. In US big corporations have interests in not allowing the state to stir in - the view of significant amount of people is that this is right so. In Germany the predominant view is that the state should provide the service and the big business is of course eager to comply because state orders are big and regulate market to the heir wishes. The state on the other hand has no interest in changing status quo because it is nice to deal with big business of course. Fortunately the public in both countries support the view that the status quo is the best what we can get - this is the root (or bg part of) the problem - nobody is willing to see the stated issues as a problem so they are unlikely to be solved.
unless of course it is a tax office (or some other god like institution) that has a free ride and does not even need a court order to invide your privacy and all this of course for your own good.
common risk calculations miss one important point: it is not only probability of the loss but also what such a loss does toy your company. If such risk factor were to happen and you lose something but not much and company can recover then you can use your probability model to figure out what is more efficient. This stops as soon as we deal with loss of data that can break the company. Another thing is: it is not a question whether outsource or not but how do you manage your IT. You need procedures to be in place in case of failure and or special wishes, how to deal with privacy and security, where are backups and how can I get data back, are my vital applications available all the time, most of the time or sometimes etc. In other words: outsourcing means not: somebody else takes care about my shit for a small fee and I can sit on my arse reading/. but a structured approach to the needs of the company. Once the needs are written down and checks to be done are known one can have a look in the market and see whether there is a company that can provide service that is required. If there is one cheaper than a local staff can do then of course problem solved. Still one requires of the manager that he at least asked basic questions. Our friend here obviously did not so he should indeed worry. I suppose he does not any more because he already dealt with the problem: he outsourced his IT and asked experts (i.e./.) to take care of the security of the chosen solution. At the end of the day the question is: can they afford the level of IT quality they would like to have.
GP is a racist blob and still managed to instigate an essay on your workings with kids which makes me wonder if anything can be for the good even an arse like the him/her. hell, it could also be (my experience) that formal education is not only bringing you skills and information that you need (and also one that is completly useless) as prescribed in curriculum but provides you an opportunity to develop social skills needed in your adult life by e.g. exposing you to violence of your peers (hopefully controlled by school well enough not to cause serious damage) and pressure to conform from teachers and your peers. You learn that at school although that is not what it is (officially) built for. I only hope that this did not have to be that painful for my kids as it was for me. Maybe just maybe it is the only way to use your potential?
Slashdot Mirror
you of course have a point but I have seen enough of managers whose eyes went glassy before the first sentence of the explanation has even been completed. It is difficult to explain things to people who are managers either because they were technically incompetent, too agressive to work in a team or jump to frequently between companies to have any idea what the one in which they work currently actually does. Obviously the MBA courses consider the actual work beyond financial success as an uniform mass that can be sliced, transported etc without any difference on the end product - something that is evidently not correct albeit this may be avoiding perception as it is difficult to see things clearly in ever changing world of saving cuts, bonuses that they induce and position hops (made to avoid consequences).
I make it simple for you as you are obviously on the other side. There are basically 3 basic ways to save money while doing a project and consequently 4 different decisions you can make:
OC last option does not work on a market where nobody is willing to pay that premium and where consequently there is nobody delivering this better quality so nobody even knows that one can do better. That is especially true in situations where customer does not care as long as the product KOW (kind of works) and its inadequacies and suffering they cause is by somebody else while at the same time barrier to entry is high enough to prevent real competition. What is really appalling is that people do not understand consequences of their actions choosing suboptimal but cheap product and wondering why it does not work.
Bottom line is a definition of where the point of 'good enough' is - neither financial nor technical expertise only are sufficient to make a good decision, consequences are usually hanging on techie necks after bonies have been consumed by managers though. Justification for direct action at least in some cases one may think.
Well of course that is your choice and if it is making you happy then that is OK. Having this as a requirement for a prospective employee is just silly but I took notice and put it in my CV.
I wonder how matters that belong to private life of an employee is a matter of interest for the company unless these activities are illegal in which case it is a case for justice department not for a company. In other words: I CAN share my hobbies and interests with the company but I DO NOT HAVE TO. I am however not surprised by the way the shear possibility that somebody may have a private life can lead to bulling attempts. Fascinating.
well this may be but it may also be that people got building permission to build in normally dried river beds and when the big rain came then water did not have any place to go but raised above the level it would normally raise to which means morons that build in the river plains and river beds as in Istambul should be held accountable for what they did.
this only for those that can read of course for the rest there is no noticeable difference.
to me it looks like one more example of justice system malfunctioning. It is not a great malfunction but shows that punishment and the crime are matched not by the facts but by the random acts of gov. officials. Was it not something that american constitution tried to prevent?
GP assumes too much I think. The prices on fragmented and assward mobile markets (like in US and to some extent EU) do not compare to what people in Japan experience. Most likely the japanese boys and girls would not have noticed a difference (except maybe that some music would not play). This of course does not make the bandwidth stealing in any way correct and the whole process good. That the whole thing is unethical and wrong will not stop anybody of course.
For those that still do not want to give up the fight read this.
This is of course not to say that negative result of a search is something to snare upon as it provided some certainty instead of hope only but how serious these bugs were and why we have not seen much slipping trough these bug catching parties as it could be expected from any software enterprise? I mean there is no ideal tester so something gets always true.
I do not live in US and I could not care less but here it says that the public prosecutor can chose whether federal or state law applies and that under the first it can even confiscate property used for drugs production even if owners did not know about such activity taking place. This looked odd to me that such practice could be possible but that does not surprised me at all - I know it from my country that drug laws are strange.
I wonder if Crichton read "The Invincible" before he wrote "Prey".
We are of course not that far yet but we are already on a path possibly leading us into problems. The question is whether we survive if we are confronted with 'mechanical life' if you will. Funny how Hollywood in its silliness and superficiality always wants us be eliminated by superior race (of machines or aliens) that has complex intelligence (or at least reminds us in some sense which of course is not intelligent then) whereas you do not have to be very smart to eliminate us.
This reminds me of a novel: "Invincible" by Master Stanislaw. He published it first time in 1964. A prophet you might say.
OTOH the actual scrum in essence is just the time boxes, sprints, backlogs, scrum masters and all this such. Whether this is better than properly organized project I do not know but to me it looks like a production line and that is I met once in my life and I hated it so much that this was a huge motivation to finish university and become an engineer instead of production line worker. OC this is all sold to us as empowering, self-organizing etc but reality is that this is just another way of put a whip to developer's arse. They also spice it all up with some religious like zeal which I dislike.
Bottom line is that there is no silver bullet and companies that believe in it are just wasting the money (avoiding waste is one of scrum principles apparently). What the actual engineers do is to do their work despite efforts of management to screw (scrum???) it.
Funny part of the training was when the trainer mentioned the companies where he introduced scrum before. One of them was our competitor that collapsed AFTER scrum was introduced there.
I guess there is no easy way and the only thing simple prohibition is likely to achieve is black market and the best prevention is close community bonds that allow to see it coming early enough.
Yes indeed this is 'progress'.
In other words that there is no absolute protection against car theft does not mean that you do not have to lock your vehicle when you leave it in the parking lot. methinks.
I see no problem with GOTs as long as they are used properly. The reason why their use should be restricted is that brainless people left with the choice:
combine the two and use GOTO and other programming methods without thinking producing structureless bulk of code. Resulting monstrous spaghetti like thing may function sometimes but becomes a hell of a trap when used as code base for next design. This 'sometimes' working part is also interesting albeit today this is not of so much concern as people are used to crappy software by now.
You are not looking far enuff. For instance why not having two sets - one for wify one for girlfriend? If one grows such additional organ on one's knee it would t hen give quite new meaning to the phrase" f.k yourself in knee'.
assume it works for us i.e. customers then soon airlines will have a look at it too to predict and prevent? What happens when they try to alter the future that has already been predicted - crash of worlds or something. Fascinating anyway. Especially reading TFA is like learning a new foreign language (except LISP that is)
It would be refreshing if the matters of god and/or deity were dealt with by people of Kant's, Descartes' et al stature and capability as instead of putting argument forward to find out the truth they argue to win because they believe (this in a sense that they believe god exists or they believe god does not exist) but that is I guess too much to ask for so we have this constant bubbling about the subject that is not bringing anything except exitment (or at least for some it does). I do not mean PP but the discussion which in any way reach beliefs. It seems our brains are designed this way so that we believe, What we believe in is irrelevant as long as we have a herd to which we can belong.
There are issues where state has to accept responsibility. Usually they have to do wih so called natural monopoles. It does not mean that the state has to do things - usually it can issue licenses and support the poor if they cannot afford service deemed needed for the whole public. In US big corporations have interests in not allowing the state to stir in - the view of significant amount of people is that this is right so. In Germany the predominant view is that the state should provide the service and the big business is of course eager to comply because state orders are big and regulate market to the heir wishes. The state on the other hand has no interest in changing status quo because it is nice to deal with big business of course. Fortunately the public in both countries support the view that the status quo is the best what we can get - this is the root (or bg part of) the problem - nobody is willing to see the stated issues as a problem so they are unlikely to be solved.
unless of course it is a tax office (or some other god like institution) that has a free ride and does not even need a court order to invide your privacy and all this of course for your own good.
common risk calculations miss one important point: it is not only probability of the loss but also what such a loss does toy your company. If such risk factor were to happen and you lose something but not much and company can recover then you can use your probability model to figure out what is more efficient. This stops as soon as we deal with loss of data that can break the company. Another thing is: it is not a question whether outsource or not but how do you manage your IT. You need procedures to be in place in case of failure and or special wishes, how to deal with privacy and security, where are backups and how can I get data back, are my vital applications available all the time, most of the time or sometimes etc. In other words: outsourcing means not: somebody else takes care about my shit for a small fee and I can sit on my arse reading /. but a structured approach to the needs of the company. Once the needs are written down and checks to be done are known one can have a look in the market and see whether there is a company that can provide service that is required. If there is one cheaper than a local staff can do then of course problem solved. Still one requires of the manager that he at least asked basic questions. Our friend here obviously did not so he should indeed worry. I suppose he does not any more because he already dealt with the problem: he outsourced his IT and asked experts (i.e. /.) to take care of the security of the chosen solution. At the end of the day the question is: can they afford the level of IT quality they would like to have.
GP is a racist blob and still managed to instigate an essay on your workings with kids which makes me wonder if anything can be for the good even an arse like the him/her. hell, it could also be (my experience) that formal education is not only bringing you skills and information that you need (and also one that is completly useless) as prescribed in curriculum but provides you an opportunity to develop social skills needed in your adult life by e.g. exposing you to violence of your peers (hopefully controlled by school well enough not to cause serious damage) and pressure to conform from teachers and your peers. You learn that at school although that is not what it is (officially) built for. I only hope that this did not have to be that painful for my kids as it was for me. Maybe just maybe it is the only way to use your potential?