It's like the doom and gloom people who say that America has lost its manufacturing base when we are actually manufacturing more than we ever have in our history - other than war times. I think the doom and gloom prophesy is right up there with Plato saying that the younger generation is the ruin of us all and that the future is bleak. The young dislike the old. The old don't like the young. The world's like a honey badger, it doesn't care and doesn't afraid of anything.
Absolutely true and not a point I was asking about or commenting on. I was simply addressing the idea way back up there in the initial post that I replied to.;-) I quite agree with the rest of your statement. Hell, I don't even know who the OP was any more. Hmm... Ah yes - "you can be sure to a big percentage that some one else is hacking it." No, not really. You can be sure, to a big percent, that someone *could* be. Not that there is. It's not even statistically likely that someone is actively hacking it with 98% of them being abandoned/no longer developed.
You're confusing Libertarianism with an economic model. It is not. Libertarianism is a political ideology. Laissez faire capitalism is entirely different and is only subscribed to by a (actually) small group of noisy Libertarians. I'm a dyed in the wool Libertarian and am more often mistaken for a Socialist which is just plain silly but much of what I believe does end up mirroring Socialism in results, but the routes and reasonings are different.
So, no... You don't understand - as is evidenced by your confusing it with an economic model. You just think you do. That's okay and I don't blame you - the fault is not really your own. We allow a whole bunch of people into the tent and we can't really stop the vocal few but they do not actually represent the majority. Also, silencing them would kind of be antithetical for us to do.
I don't really like Wikipedia but the first four paragraphs (that's all you'd really need) of the article on Libertarianism is pretty accurate, I guess. The whole article is not bad, not bad at all. I know some of the authors and have been involved in the party since the late 70s or early 80s. I'd be more than happy to help you clear up any misconceptions you have, if you're honestly interested.
Ayn Rand was an idiot and Rand Paul is not a Libertarian. Libertarians are actually (more often then not) quite far to the left - further left than any elected Democrat except maybe Bernie. I already have all the freedoms I need and most of the rights I want - I can buy the rest or just get away with breaking the law. What I want is you to have the freedoms you deserve and the rights to act on those freedoms.
I want you safe, healthy, fed, and able to risk making bad decisions. I want a strong social safety net. It's cheaper to avoid problems than it is to fix them. You being productive means I can be more financially comfortable. However, that's rather low on the list of priorities. The important thing is that I want you to be in a position to enjoy and make use of your rights. I want single payer health care (and will happily pay the taxes needed) to ensure that you have the chance to do with your body what you want. Businesses have rights but they're pretty damned low as a priority. The you, the commons, and then what's left we can allow for corporations. The individual and the commons must be first.
I am a Libertarian. There's no such thing as a free market. There can never be such. Zealots are stupid, no single pure system will ever work on a large scale. I, I am a Libertarian. You have now met one. You might actually be one and not even know it. The "liberty" is kind of in the word. It's about you - not businesses and not markets.
Also, to clear up a bit that might be confusing. Freedoms vs Rights ala Liberties. I have the freedom to kill you. I do not have the right to do so. I am not at liberty to take your life. Those should suit for the definitions, well enough. I'm free to help with anything else you might wish to know. The email is also valid and is occasionally checked.
I've seen on/, many times a public corporation in the US, by law, has to use the cheapest developer possible, otherwise they will be sued for not maximizing their profits.
I dunno if this clarifies or muddies your point. Starting in 1992ish I was hiring traffic engineers at a pay rate of about $140k/year plus all the various benefits and bonuses. I suspect there was a near 0 rate of unemployment in the field as most of these had to also know a bit of CS and a bit of programming. We were certainly willing to train - we had to.
Yet, when I look today, the unemployment rate is up - near 3% (a bit higher, from a quick search). The fucking median pay rate is less than half of what we gave as STARTING pay.
Now, I am not an economist but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night and I have taken a few courses and I have written a few books. Poorer people have less spending money. More people entered the field. Now there is unemployment (not a lot, but some) and I guess that's pretty normal. But I'm just not sure that it matters. If I'd only been able to hire at 200k per employee then I'd have just made sure that number was in the contract. 'Snot really like I give a shit how much I'm paying (to some extent) 'cause I'm just going to raise the price of services. That and my employees can buy more stuff, spend more in taxes, and the taxes were what paid their salaries or, eventually, their attendance at functions or shopping in stores or malls.
It's kind of a closed system.
Like I said, I'm not really sure if this muddies, argues against, or even if it supports your assertion. I don't really know. I didn't find it easy to hire but I found enough hires and enough people who could demonstrate a history of adaptation and a willingness to learn new things. Of course, at the time, finding traffic engineers was like finding hen's teeth. (They kind of, sort of, maybe existed - some called transportation engineers which is sort of close enough but we didn't deal with choo choo trains while many of them did and they often worked on the 'other side' where they'd do work for fleets like UPS, FedEx, etc.)
If I can only hire A for $200 then I'm going to hire B for $150, spend $30 training, and then raise his or her pay slowly to $200 as they learn their job. Or I'm going to contact the local university and fund some studies and steal the people who do the work. I'm not bashful... Hell, I'll hire person C, make him sweep the fucking floor, and pay for him to attend university so he gets the skills required to do A. I'll go to company XYZ and tell them how much I am paying, what the benefits are, and invite them in to interview - I'll even pay to relocate them.
Why? Well, traffic modeling was lucrative *and* turning into a necessary thing. I'm just going to shunt the expenses off on the taxpayer or the businesses who hire us. If they don't like the prices they don't need the services or they can do something about making sure that I have adequate hiring pools. I didn't mind investing in employees - they are the greatest asset your company holds. Sure, I have patents, intellectual property, and a variety of secret things like predictive or deterministic (sort of) algorithms but those don't do me a whole lot of good without the people who implement them. If I have to pay 10% for staff then you have to pay 20% more for services (overhead and downtime between projects if they happen, call it insurance). If it doesn't work then there's not enough call or need for my business in the first place.
I dunno but I'm not sure I agree. I think part of the problem is the company sees employees entirely wrong these days. You have an obligation to the good ones - a bunch of obligations, really. Train for or educate for the needs you have. It's not a bad thing to go to a university and get some research done - just pay for it, they're happy for the cash and the learning. The added bonus is you can then purloin the good students. I'm not sure that this is bad for the economy as a whole and I'm not sure if I'm qualified to speculate but there you have it.
Hmmm.... You know, janitors work with some fairly complicated machinery, work with a variety of chemicals, and need specific training to deal with certain kinds of hazardous materials or body fluids using the current best practices.
I'm not sure why people think they don't actually have skilled janitors. Have you ever seen what goes in to resurfacing an industrial sized tiled floor? Have you ever seen them use sulfuric acid to clean out clogged drains before needing to call in a licensed plumber? How about needing to repair a the closed units that scrub and buff?
Your nose, it is long for all the good you think you are.
I own several AR-15s in varied configurations. They've not even killed a nommy animal. They've killed some paper, so there's that. I don't even use them for self-defense purposes - they're just fun to shoot and really good at killing paper. If you've never spent a day mercilessly slaughtering innocent paper then you're missing out on a whole lot of fun. It's actually pretty intellectual, or it can be. It's fun to see just how far you can push the envelope and the AR-15 community means building out a special purpose firearm an enjoyable task.
Thanks. It seems that they've grown quite a bit. It also sounds like something I'd do - which is probably a bad idea.;-) I think I'll read a few books on C and find a new (VIM probably) way to code. That'll keep me amused for a little while. There really should be standards with these things - at least I'd think so but I am not a real programmer or anything.
We'd already be in the process sending bombers over to bomb them. (Which is why we'd be shooting down their satellite.) I'm pretty sure that's a foregone conclusion, at that point.
They can not. I'm up above Farmington. I'm in a different district. However, the Sun Journal will surely cover it. The KJ will and the PPH will. I'm just outside of Rangeley, about 25 miles out, technically. Well, if you want technical, I am not home but you get the idea.
To the other AC - you can't vote for me, legally. But if you want an absentee ballot... (No, I'm kidding...) The email address is real - and checked sometimes. I'll be back in the state in a short bit (I need to go check on some property first) and I don't know when. I don't drink but I'd buy you a beer.;-) (No, not to entice you to move and vote but because I've never met another Mainer who's a Slashdot reader. I've met countless online people in the real world but no Slashdot folks.)
I'm not entirely sure when I'll be back - hopefully before hunting season is over. However, I'm kind of meandering aimlessly, or was. Then I got stuck in Buffalo. Err... I've been here for over a month now. Well over. Ayuh... Technically, I'm "from away" but I didn't try to change things when I moved in so, with some work, I'm almost technically a Mainer. I'm still an import but they gossip down in the village about me less than they used to. I dare say, they actually like me. Well, as much as one likes an import. So far, indications are that I've a decent shot at the election. It doesn't mean much on the national scale and I'm okay with that. I don't plan on serving more than a single term, anyhow.
I'm not sure that that should be at -1. I mean, come on now. We have guests. That means we have certain standards to uphold. One of those standards is letting them see the true/. and, as such, we should probably have the app guy, the cow guy, and APK.
This is where we fling poop and screech like howler monkeys. It's what we do. We shouldn't get out the fancy China, we're just going to break it when they leave.
This may tie in with the bigger question but, as someone who wrote many (probably several times more than needed) lines of code, thankfully for internal use only, and done a very bad job of it - needing specific versions seems like something that I would have done. To try to state this more eloquently:
Why do we, in this day and age, still need to rely on specific version dependencies?
Be gentle, I was never very good and I've not done much programming in 15 years. When I do it's usually something small, unimportant, and something I just needed for whatever silly reason I had at the time. It's still not good. It's still far too verbose. I'm pretty much the master of spaghetti code - you should see some of my Perl.
Anyhow, it seems like we should be, somehow, past this. That thing should either be static, to some extent, or consistent as versions change. I'm surely not using the correct terminology but, to give an example, calls to an API shouldn't change and the results should be the same even if new features are added. The code should not need to change if the dependency is v. 3.4 or 5.9 so long as I'm still trying to get the same result from that code. Should it? I guess I can see requiring v. 3.4 or greater in some instances (like a new feature was added at that point). But needing specific versions seems, well, like something I'd do. I'm pretty sure that's a bad thing.
Sorry, but I've pondered this while reading/. or SO questions before. I'm thinking about picking C back up or poking at Rust. I'd considered Go but I already need to brush up on my C. I'm not sure that I'd need it for anything I intend to do. I got to work with some great programmers - and learned a lot (not enough) but they'd probably chide me for needing a specific version number as a dependency. They were pretty brutal. Yes, they did tear down and rewrite all of my work. I think they actively plotted my demise on more than one occasion but I kept them well paid, stocked in toys, and gave them all the caffeine they desired.
Keep bringing up Clippy and, I'm telling you, I'm going to write Clippy for the terminal and get it included in the Linux Base. Don't make me do it. I have gifs and enough source code to copy. I'll make it work with *every* prompt...
$ ls -lah >> foo.txt
(Clippy) Hi! It looks like you're trying to generate a list, would you like some help with that?
There are enough examples so that even *I* can write that. Pfft... Gimme a little and I can package it as a.deb and get it up on launchpad. I then tie it in to systemd and it'll get included by default. Hmm...
$ journalctl
(Clippy) Hi! You're looking for binary error logs? Would you like some help with that?
Also, look for a smaller company. When I sold we only had about two hundred people spread over five offices, two of which were skeleton offices which expanded when we had work in the area. I'm pretty sure that many larger businesses no longer care about employees. We had no HR department. (They do now, I understand that they don't really like the idea.) We let the whole team (or anyone) sit in on interviews. I hate the term "employees" but "assets" seems even less humane. When I describe it, I state they worked with me - it's not like I stopped working when I hired help. I just moved on to other things.
I've actually thought about writing a management book but I'm pretty sure that there's no way it would be utilized. I don't care about selling it. I've got enough money. I'd only want to write it in hopes that it gets read, digested, and improved on - as I made loads of mistakes. Owning those mistakes and knowing when to let my ego lose and ask for help (or even just information) from someone more skilled than I is, I think, another important aspect.
However, when I look back... I'd have been the same person regardless. Much of it is just dumb luck. I was in the right place, at the right time, knew the right person, had domain knowledge, and was able to take some risks. I don't think I did anything special (unless you count making the world's greatest traffic sim "game" - I'm biased - as special and, really, that was improved on by so many others that I can't really claim it as my own). I just got lucky and was smart enough to hire smart people and then listen to them. I started off with my own code, running my own server farm, etc... I had one person who worked with me. Shit luck, really. Sure, I worked hard but not as hard as many others. Traffic modeling was pretty new, relatively speaking. Compute cycles and storage got cheap. I'm just a mathematician. I didn't even write very good code.:D (No, really, it was not good.)
I share this often, it is not verbatim but it's close... "Code comments go in the code, not on coffee soaked index cards. Asshole!" Heh... I miss the place. We were geeks doing new things. We were passionate and willing to apply a hammer. I don't share the intimate details publicly (though I suppose someone could dig them out of financial statements as the now parent company is publicly traded) but email's available if you're curious and actually interested in the industry. It is not easy, not even today, but it entails so much data and so many variables that it is impossible to be bored. You're basically trying to control chaos theory and modeling predicted human outcomes and all that that entails. Then you twist and poke at the algorithm and variables until you match existing patterns well enough. Then you can actually try to make changes. (Most people skip the middle set - they never check the data against reality, it's expensive and the companies doing it today are not so very good, many of them.)
Ah well... My novella is complete. I'd go on but I shan't bore you. More...
I lend a hand on a few forums. It keeps me busy. When I see something like that, "Reply Quickly." I just ignore it. I don't do homework nor do I do your job for you. I'll help, if you show an interest in actually learning. I won't help if you were too lazy to use a search engine (for common terms, I can understand a beginner not knowing which keywords to use).
Yes, I knew (or thought) you were agreeing. Part of my reply was meant to be tongue in cheek. I really should use the/s tag more often.;-)
Long term growth, stability, stewardship? Those are things of the past... From what I read, it's unlikely that one will find a good work environment these days. It's sad, really. It's not like this change has done anything to better the world. Money is important, true. But so aren't ethics. Sometimes you do the right thing because it's the right thing - other times, you do it because the right thing is the best choice for long-term results.
No, this was them floating a ping pong ball with sound. It was MIT. They were video taping it - and watching the waves because you can do that with a high speed camera. I'm pretty sure they were neither studying ping pong nor acoustics - I'm pretty sure that they were working on fluid dynamics. I have no idea what ever became of it, it was just neat to see. This device seems like a much refined form of the above. MIT was not, as far as I know, the first to float a ping pong ball with sound. They might have been but I've no idea. S'not my field and thus I'm not really qualified to opine.
Slashdot Mirror
It's like the doom and gloom people who say that America has lost its manufacturing base when we are actually manufacturing more than we ever have in our history - other than war times. I think the doom and gloom prophesy is right up there with Plato saying that the younger generation is the ruin of us all and that the future is bleak. The young dislike the old. The old don't like the young. The world's like a honey badger, it doesn't care and doesn't afraid of anything.
Absolutely true and not a point I was asking about or commenting on. I was simply addressing the idea way back up there in the initial post that I replied to. ;-) I quite agree with the rest of your statement. Hell, I don't even know who the OP was any more. Hmm... Ah yes - "you can be sure to a big percentage that some one else is hacking it." No, not really. You can be sure, to a big percent, that someone *could* be. Not that there is. It's not even statistically likely that someone is actively hacking it with 98% of them being abandoned/no longer developed.
You're confusing Libertarianism with an economic model. It is not. Libertarianism is a political ideology. Laissez faire capitalism is entirely different and is only subscribed to by a (actually) small group of noisy Libertarians. I'm a dyed in the wool Libertarian and am more often mistaken for a Socialist which is just plain silly but much of what I believe does end up mirroring Socialism in results, but the routes and reasonings are different.
So, no... You don't understand - as is evidenced by your confusing it with an economic model. You just think you do. That's okay and I don't blame you - the fault is not really your own. We allow a whole bunch of people into the tent and we can't really stop the vocal few but they do not actually represent the majority. Also, silencing them would kind of be antithetical for us to do.
I don't really like Wikipedia but the first four paragraphs (that's all you'd really need) of the article on Libertarianism is pretty accurate, I guess. The whole article is not bad, not bad at all. I know some of the authors and have been involved in the party since the late 70s or early 80s. I'd be more than happy to help you clear up any misconceptions you have, if you're honestly interested.
Ayn Rand was an idiot and Rand Paul is not a Libertarian. Libertarians are actually (more often then not) quite far to the left - further left than any elected Democrat except maybe Bernie. I already have all the freedoms I need and most of the rights I want - I can buy the rest or just get away with breaking the law. What I want is you to have the freedoms you deserve and the rights to act on those freedoms.
I want you safe, healthy, fed, and able to risk making bad decisions. I want a strong social safety net. It's cheaper to avoid problems than it is to fix them. You being productive means I can be more financially comfortable. However, that's rather low on the list of priorities. The important thing is that I want you to be in a position to enjoy and make use of your rights. I want single payer health care (and will happily pay the taxes needed) to ensure that you have the chance to do with your body what you want. Businesses have rights but they're pretty damned low as a priority. The you, the commons, and then what's left we can allow for corporations. The individual and the commons must be first.
I am a Libertarian. There's no such thing as a free market. There can never be such. Zealots are stupid, no single pure system will ever work on a large scale. I, I am a Libertarian. You have now met one. You might actually be one and not even know it. The "liberty" is kind of in the word. It's about you - not businesses and not markets.
Also, to clear up a bit that might be confusing. Freedoms vs Rights ala Liberties. I have the freedom to kill you. I do not have the right to do so. I am not at liberty to take your life. Those should suit for the definitions, well enough. I'm free to help with anything else you might wish to know. The email is also valid and is occasionally checked.
I've seen on /, many times a public corporation in the US, by law, has to use the cheapest developer possible, otherwise they will be sued for not maximizing their profits.
And yet, I've never seen that. Ever.
I dunno if this clarifies or muddies your point. Starting in 1992ish I was hiring traffic engineers at a pay rate of about $140k/year plus all the various benefits and bonuses. I suspect there was a near 0 rate of unemployment in the field as most of these had to also know a bit of CS and a bit of programming. We were certainly willing to train - we had to.
Yet, when I look today, the unemployment rate is up - near 3% (a bit higher, from a quick search). The fucking median pay rate is less than half of what we gave as STARTING pay.
Now, I am not an economist but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night and I have taken a few courses and I have written a few books. Poorer people have less spending money. More people entered the field. Now there is unemployment (not a lot, but some) and I guess that's pretty normal. But I'm just not sure that it matters. If I'd only been able to hire at 200k per employee then I'd have just made sure that number was in the contract. 'Snot really like I give a shit how much I'm paying (to some extent) 'cause I'm just going to raise the price of services. That and my employees can buy more stuff, spend more in taxes, and the taxes were what paid their salaries or, eventually, their attendance at functions or shopping in stores or malls.
It's kind of a closed system.
Like I said, I'm not really sure if this muddies, argues against, or even if it supports your assertion. I don't really know. I didn't find it easy to hire but I found enough hires and enough people who could demonstrate a history of adaptation and a willingness to learn new things. Of course, at the time, finding traffic engineers was like finding hen's teeth. (They kind of, sort of, maybe existed - some called transportation engineers which is sort of close enough but we didn't deal with choo choo trains while many of them did and they often worked on the 'other side' where they'd do work for fleets like UPS, FedEx, etc.)
If I can only hire A for $200 then I'm going to hire B for $150, spend $30 training, and then raise his or her pay slowly to $200 as they learn their job. Or I'm going to contact the local university and fund some studies and steal the people who do the work. I'm not bashful... Hell, I'll hire person C, make him sweep the fucking floor, and pay for him to attend university so he gets the skills required to do A. I'll go to company XYZ and tell them how much I am paying, what the benefits are, and invite them in to interview - I'll even pay to relocate them.
Why? Well, traffic modeling was lucrative *and* turning into a necessary thing. I'm just going to shunt the expenses off on the taxpayer or the businesses who hire us. If they don't like the prices they don't need the services or they can do something about making sure that I have adequate hiring pools. I didn't mind investing in employees - they are the greatest asset your company holds. Sure, I have patents, intellectual property, and a variety of secret things like predictive or deterministic (sort of) algorithms but those don't do me a whole lot of good without the people who implement them. If I have to pay 10% for staff then you have to pay 20% more for services (overhead and downtime between projects if they happen, call it insurance). If it doesn't work then there's not enough call or need for my business in the first place.
I dunno but I'm not sure I agree. I think part of the problem is the company sees employees entirely wrong these days. You have an obligation to the good ones - a bunch of obligations, really. Train for or educate for the needs you have. It's not a bad thing to go to a university and get some research done - just pay for it, they're happy for the cash and the learning. The added bonus is you can then purloin the good students. I'm not sure that this is bad for the economy as a whole and I'm not sure if I'm qualified to speculate but there you have it.
Those people didn't apply for unemployment so will probably not be included in the statistics.
Hmmm.... You know, janitors work with some fairly complicated machinery, work with a variety of chemicals, and need specific training to deal with certain kinds of hazardous materials or body fluids using the current best practices.
I'm not sure why people think they don't actually have skilled janitors. Have you ever seen what goes in to resurfacing an industrial sized tiled floor? Have you ever seen them use sulfuric acid to clean out clogged drains before needing to call in a licensed plumber? How about needing to repair a the closed units that scrub and buff?
Your nose, it is long for all the good you think you are.
I own several AR-15s in varied configurations. They've not even killed a nommy animal. They've killed some paper, so there's that. I don't even use them for self-defense purposes - they're just fun to shoot and really good at killing paper. If you've never spent a day mercilessly slaughtering innocent paper then you're missing out on a whole lot of fun. It's actually pretty intellectual, or it can be. It's fun to see just how far you can push the envelope and the AR-15 community means building out a special purpose firearm an enjoyable task.
Thanks. It seems that they've grown quite a bit. It also sounds like something I'd do - which is probably a bad idea. ;-) I think I'll read a few books on C and find a new (VIM probably) way to code. That'll keep me amused for a little while. There really should be standards with these things - at least I'd think so but I am not a real programmer or anything.
We'd already be in the process sending bombers over to bomb them. (Which is why we'd be shooting down their satellite.) I'm pretty sure that's a foregone conclusion, at that point.
I didn't realize that Larry visited /..
That's what you get for believing stupid people. ;-) Quite a few of us drive a manual - insist on it.
Now I know about china. And knowing is half the battle.
For some definition of symbol, yes. Assuming we're to consider the alphabet symbols then, certainly. You *might* be over-thinking it, however. ;-)
They can not. I'm up above Farmington. I'm in a different district. However, the Sun Journal will surely cover it. The KJ will and the PPH will. I'm just outside of Rangeley, about 25 miles out, technically. Well, if you want technical, I am not home but you get the idea.
To the other AC - you can't vote for me, legally. But if you want an absentee ballot... (No, I'm kidding...) The email address is real - and checked sometimes. I'll be back in the state in a short bit (I need to go check on some property first) and I don't know when. I don't drink but I'd buy you a beer. ;-) (No, not to entice you to move and vote but because I've never met another Mainer who's a Slashdot reader. I've met countless online people in the real world but no Slashdot folks.)
I'm not entirely sure when I'll be back - hopefully before hunting season is over. However, I'm kind of meandering aimlessly, or was. Then I got stuck in Buffalo. Err... I've been here for over a month now. Well over. Ayuh... Technically, I'm "from away" but I didn't try to change things when I moved in so, with some work, I'm almost technically a Mainer. I'm still an import but they gossip down in the village about me less than they used to. I dare say, they actually like me. Well, as much as one likes an import. So far, indications are that I've a decent shot at the election. It doesn't mean much on the national scale and I'm okay with that. I don't plan on serving more than a single term, anyhow.
If we're being pedantic then, and my English is not the best, I think there might be more:
In fact if anything "duck tape" is the more correct answer.
Maybe:
In fact, if anything, "duct tape" is the more...
I'm not sure that quotation marks are correct either.
It might be:
In fact, if anything, 'duct tape' is the more...
As formatting is allowed, if I recall the writing standards, we might want to go with:
In fact, if anything duct tape is the more...
I mean, you know, if we're going to be pedantic... However, I use the shotgun approach with commas, so don't trust me.
I'm not sure that that should be at -1. I mean, come on now. We have guests. That means we have certain standards to uphold. One of those standards is letting them see the true /. and, as such, we should probably have the app guy, the cow guy, and APK.
This is where we fling poop and screech like howler monkeys. It's what we do. We shouldn't get out the fancy China, we're just going to break it when they leave.
This may tie in with the bigger question but, as someone who wrote many (probably several times more than needed) lines of code, thankfully for internal use only, and done a very bad job of it - needing specific versions seems like something that I would have done. To try to state this more eloquently:
Why do we, in this day and age, still need to rely on specific version dependencies?
Be gentle, I was never very good and I've not done much programming in 15 years. When I do it's usually something small, unimportant, and something I just needed for whatever silly reason I had at the time. It's still not good. It's still far too verbose. I'm pretty much the master of spaghetti code - you should see some of my Perl.
Anyhow, it seems like we should be, somehow, past this. That thing should either be static, to some extent, or consistent as versions change. I'm surely not using the correct terminology but, to give an example, calls to an API shouldn't change and the results should be the same even if new features are added. The code should not need to change if the dependency is v. 3.4 or 5.9 so long as I'm still trying to get the same result from that code. Should it? I guess I can see requiring v. 3.4 or greater in some instances (like a new feature was added at that point). But needing specific versions seems, well, like something I'd do. I'm pretty sure that's a bad thing.
Sorry, but I've pondered this while reading /. or SO questions before. I'm thinking about picking C back up or poking at Rust. I'd considered Go but I already need to brush up on my C. I'm not sure that I'd need it for anything I intend to do. I got to work with some great programmers - and learned a lot (not enough) but they'd probably chide me for needing a specific version number as a dependency. They were pretty brutal. Yes, they did tear down and rewrite all of my work. I think they actively plotted my demise on more than one occasion but I kept them well paid, stocked in toys, and gave them all the caffeine they desired.
Yes, but that means it's on par with C#.
Keep bringing up Clippy and, I'm telling you, I'm going to write Clippy for the terminal and get it included in the Linux Base. Don't make me do it. I have gifs and enough source code to copy. I'll make it work with *every* prompt...
$ ls -lah >> foo.txt
(Clippy) Hi! It looks like you're trying to generate a list, would you like some help with that?
There are enough examples so that even *I* can write that. Pfft... Gimme a little and I can package it as a .deb and get it up on launchpad. I then tie it in to systemd and it'll get included by default. Hmm...
$ journalctl
(Clippy) Hi! You're looking for binary error logs? Would you like some help with that?
Clippy touched me in bad places.
Also, look for a smaller company. When I sold we only had about two hundred people spread over five offices, two of which were skeleton offices which expanded when we had work in the area. I'm pretty sure that many larger businesses no longer care about employees. We had no HR department. (They do now, I understand that they don't really like the idea.) We let the whole team (or anyone) sit in on interviews. I hate the term "employees" but "assets" seems even less humane. When I describe it, I state they worked with me - it's not like I stopped working when I hired help. I just moved on to other things.
I've actually thought about writing a management book but I'm pretty sure that there's no way it would be utilized. I don't care about selling it. I've got enough money. I'd only want to write it in hopes that it gets read, digested, and improved on - as I made loads of mistakes. Owning those mistakes and knowing when to let my ego lose and ask for help (or even just information) from someone more skilled than I is, I think, another important aspect.
However, when I look back... I'd have been the same person regardless. Much of it is just dumb luck. I was in the right place, at the right time, knew the right person, had domain knowledge, and was able to take some risks. I don't think I did anything special (unless you count making the world's greatest traffic sim "game" - I'm biased - as special and, really, that was improved on by so many others that I can't really claim it as my own). I just got lucky and was smart enough to hire smart people and then listen to them. I started off with my own code, running my own server farm, etc... I had one person who worked with me. Shit luck, really. Sure, I worked hard but not as hard as many others. Traffic modeling was pretty new, relatively speaking. Compute cycles and storage got cheap. I'm just a mathematician. I didn't even write very good code. :D (No, really, it was not good.)
I share this often, it is not verbatim but it's close... "Code comments go in the code, not on coffee soaked index cards. Asshole!" Heh... I miss the place. We were geeks doing new things. We were passionate and willing to apply a hammer. I don't share the intimate details publicly (though I suppose someone could dig them out of financial statements as the now parent company is publicly traded) but email's available if you're curious and actually interested in the industry. It is not easy, not even today, but it entails so much data and so many variables that it is impossible to be bored. You're basically trying to control chaos theory and modeling predicted human outcomes and all that that entails. Then you twist and poke at the algorithm and variables until you match existing patterns well enough. Then you can actually try to make changes. (Most people skip the middle set - they never check the data against reality, it's expensive and the companies doing it today are not so very good, many of them.)
Ah well... My novella is complete. I'd go on but I shan't bore you. More...
I lend a hand on a few forums. It keeps me busy. When I see something like that, "Reply Quickly." I just ignore it. I don't do homework nor do I do your job for you. I'll help, if you show an interest in actually learning. I won't help if you were too lazy to use a search engine (for common terms, I can understand a beginner not knowing which keywords to use).
Yes, I knew (or thought) you were agreeing. Part of my reply was meant to be tongue in cheek. I really should use the /s tag more often. ;-)
Long term growth, stability, stewardship? Those are things of the past... From what I read, it's unlikely that one will find a good work environment these days. It's sad, really. It's not like this change has done anything to better the world. Money is important, true. But so aren't ethics. Sometimes you do the right thing because it's the right thing - other times, you do it because the right thing is the best choice for long-term results.
My degree's in Applied Mathematics. You should see our papers... They're almost nothing but numbers and symbols!
No, this was them floating a ping pong ball with sound. It was MIT. They were video taping it - and watching the waves because you can do that with a high speed camera. I'm pretty sure they were neither studying ping pong nor acoustics - I'm pretty sure that they were working on fluid dynamics. I have no idea what ever became of it, it was just neat to see. This device seems like a much refined form of the above. MIT was not, as far as I know, the first to float a ping pong ball with sound. They might have been but I've no idea. S'not my field and thus I'm not really qualified to opine.