I think it just adds another layer to the storage tree: near/quick memory all the way to far/slow memory. You have your various layers of cache on the processor, RAM, RAM disks, SSDs, Hard drives, Tape drives, etc.
In my case, it was the K&R C books with foo and bar. But I'm also aware of FUBAR and what the acronym means......but I find foobar to be more "friendly", so when I don't want to insult someone per se, I'll use the foobar version. If I want to lambast someone, I'll use FUBAR (I also capitalize them as I've done in this post, so FUBAR is akin to yelling, too).
Re:Whooaaaa!!! Hold on there, big boy!
on
'Data Science' Is Dead
·
· Score: 4, Informative
You should have a different resume for each job you apply for......
Keep a master resume with all of your details. When you apply for a job, copy the master and pare it down to the information most relevant to the job you are applying for. Then edit the result so that you look like the perfect candidate.....update project descriptions to emphasize the same buzzwords in the job listing, etc.
If you only have one resume that you blast out to a ton of different job listings and they'll probably focus on the projects that are meaningless to their situation and weed you out more often than not.
Oh, and BI (business intelligence) is still going strong at the company I work for......(not my area, but there's still tons of work under that label).
I wonder whether it's FUD around the option (probably defaulted to opt-in) to participate in Microsoft's "feedback" program. Google and iOS have the same type of feature. It's basically how traffic data is captured for the various maps. There are other "user experience" data points that are captured, too.
I seem to recall a couple of updates that got yanked after their initial release because they were bricking devices. The bug was fixed and they were re-released, but it still happens way too often.
I would suspect, thought, that a car would auto-download the update but only apply when the user accepts it. Even if you turn off the car, they can't start applying an update without alerting you that the update could take X minutes --- time that you wouldn't be able to use your car.
I never dictated what the multiple is.....just that it be documented and adhered to.....for Microsoft, the multiplier might be lower (or higher) than that of Starbucks. Even if the multipliers are the same, it probably makes sense for the CEO of Microsoft to be paid more than the CEO of Starbucks since the market cap for MS is close to 6X that of Starbucks.... But regardless, the idea is just that it be documented. If the CEO needs a raise, it's because the company is doing better --- which means that everyone deserves a raise.
More concrete example: Lowest wage is $25k CIO multiplier is 100 (for a salary of $2.5M) CEO multiplier is 400 (for a salary of $10M)
If the company does well, typically, the bottom guy gets another $1,000.....but the CEO usually sees a raise from $10M to $20M. With the cap limitation, the only way to get the CEO up to $20M is to raise the bottom guy up to $50K. If the company didn't do enough better to justify that, then the CEO doesn't deserve to double his salary.
At the top tier (VP, Pres, CxO), pay should be capped as some (documented) multiplier of the lowest level salary. Bonuses should be tied to company performance. That's it. If the CIO wants to get paid more, he either needs to raise the rates of those below him or improve the performance of the company in some meaningful way. When a company making billions pays its executives $50M but lays off thousands making $40K, it feels really crappy. Sure, I understand that sometimes those layoffs boost performance and what not, but there really is a point where having MORE money doesn't really do much for you.......whereas losing your job is VERY disruptive.
Purely bogus argument. The counter is "put it in the database because it allows you to change out the front end". Both are stupid arguments because when you get around to rewriting anything, you're going to rewrite both layers. [Caveat for a company that sells their software -- having all of the code in one layer allows you to sell to more clients.]
Put the code in the right place. For large / massive data processing updates or crunching reports, the database is much more performant than doing it in the front-end code. For CRUD actions, having the work be performed in the front end makes the app more responsive.
I'm an application developer who has extensive experience as a database developer (not a DBA). I'm in favor of implementing keys and relationships to ensure that your data remains pure (bad data is one of the biggest reasons that analytics is "hard"). I'm also in favor of triggers and stored procedures if it makes sense in the context of the application. But I'm not opposed to reading a set of data into memory and looping over it when it makes sense as well.
In my area, I can actually opt to have Earthlink as my ISP instead of TWC. Earthlink offers a similar service level using the same lines that TWC laid. If I paid Earthlink for my connection, Earthlink would keep some portion and then pay TWC for use of the lines. That's more or less how deregulated power companies operate.
De-regulation along the lines of the power companies? In other words, break apart "generation" and "distribution"......make TV/broadband one entity and then make the lines themselves a different entity. Have the distribution entity charge customers the same rate scale so that other companies can compete on equal footing.
Yay for common sense (both you and Anonymous above). I run Windows....I have nothing against Linux, but working in Windows pays the bills. I patch regularly, I browse intelligently....and I haven't had a virus on *MY* machine since the Ping-Pong virus back in the DOS days.........(that was a cool virus, BTW).
Open Source isn't a cure-all. Neither is Closed Source. User behavior and knowledge is the best cure-all.
Solution: You don't get both a copyright and a trade secret.....just like you don't get a patent and a trade secret. [Maybe you mean a Trade Mark which is yet another form of IP.]
Coke has never released their formula. If you are smart enough to figure it out, you can make your own Coke. They won't patent it because then you'd be able to clone it for cheaper. They haven't copyrighted it because that would require it to be published somewhere. If someone broke in and released their formula, they could sue for the actual theft, but once the knowledge was out in the public, they couldn't do anything to anyone using that knowledge.
Agreed. As a development environment, I really dislike Eclipse. The Visual Studio tool line is great (whether you like MS or not, it's a very developer-friendly tool). Eclipse is very cumbersome to use and seems to take forever for tasks that shouldn't. While I like that it's flexible, I'd rather just use Notepad++ and a command line compiler than run Eclipse.
I'd be more inclined to go this route...if hired as a contractor, then self-evaluate whether your contract lasts longer than it would take to rewrite. If it takes longer to rewrite, communicate the problems and just triage as best you can unless they offer to extend the contract. If you have the time, refactor as you enhance so that you balance a rewrite with getting features completed.
Agreed, The people who are best at [subject X] are those that have a passion for [subject X]. When I interview people for (programming related) jobs, I focus less on what they actually know and more on whether they have a love for it (do they do programming related stuff on their own either for fun or self-improvement, etc.). Even if they don't have the skill I need immediately, I know that they will ramp up quickly and be more productive than someone who went into computer science because it was a high paying job.
If you are setting it up, you could have discreet records individually encrypted. One row correctly encrypted and (some number) of rows of fake data encrypted with a false key. Without knowing which row is good and which row is bad, an attacker would get (some number) of potential keys that return realistic but wrong data. They wouldn't need to run my decryption routines to generate these false positives.
By average of $500 / year, I mean over the six year period that corresponds to the lifespan of a console. Year one when you buy a machine. Year two when you upgrade the video card. Year three when you upgrade the CPU and RAM. Year four when you upgrade the motherboard. Etc. Over a six year period, you'll easily spend $3,000 on gaming equipment.....probably more.
While I agree that a PC that costs the same as a console is generally more performant, one of the benefits of the console world is that the upgrade cycle (in other words frequency of cash outlay) is a lot longer. In PC gaming, you are likely spending on average $500/year to keep up. In the console world, you spend once every 6 years or so. For those of us on a tighter budget, knowing that if I buy a console near the beginning of the cycle, I will still be getting similar performance near the end of the cycle. Game developers can target a known platform and optimize accordingly.
And yet, if I implement the same type of feature (with no knowledge of the magic sauce), I'm in violation of the patent.....even though it was obvious enough for me to come up with the same solution. Either the patent should include everything you need in order to implement the solution (so that I know when I'm violating it), or it shouldn't be a patent.
I'd also like software patents to have a working implementation which is what's actually covered by the patent.....much like physical patents. If I patent "sorting" (and yes, many software patents are that vague), it doesn't allow for bubble sort, selection sort, insert sort, quicksort, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it just adds another layer to the storage tree: near/quick memory all the way to far/slow memory. You have your various layers of cache on the processor, RAM, RAM disks, SSDs, Hard drives, Tape drives, etc.
You can't even trust those......it's not impossible for your company to set up their own little cell tower covering their buildings......
In my case, it was the K&R C books with foo and bar. But I'm also aware of FUBAR and what the acronym means......but I find foobar to be more "friendly", so when I don't want to insult someone per se, I'll use the foobar version. If I want to lambast someone, I'll use FUBAR (I also capitalize them as I've done in this post, so FUBAR is akin to yelling, too).
You should have a different resume for each job you apply for......
Keep a master resume with all of your details. When you apply for a job, copy the master and pare it down to the information most relevant to the job you are applying for. Then edit the result so that you look like the perfect candidate.....update project descriptions to emphasize the same buzzwords in the job listing, etc.
If you only have one resume that you blast out to a ton of different job listings and they'll probably focus on the projects that are meaningless to their situation and weed you out more often than not.
Oh, and BI (business intelligence) is still going strong at the company I work for......(not my area, but there's still tons of work under that label).
Where's the CSS to make it black/red? Your emulation is foobar'ed.
But will it protect one's Bitcoins?
This is slashdot. We all count in binary on our fingers. So -- FOUR.
I wonder whether it's FUD around the option (probably defaulted to opt-in) to participate in Microsoft's "feedback" program. Google and iOS have the same type of feature. It's basically how traffic data is captured for the various maps. There are other "user experience" data points that are captured, too.
I seem to recall a couple of updates that got yanked after their initial release because they were bricking devices. The bug was fixed and they were re-released, but it still happens way too often.
I would suspect, thought, that a car would auto-download the update but only apply when the user accepts it. Even if you turn off the car, they can't start applying an update without alerting you that the update could take X minutes --- time that you wouldn't be able to use your car.
I never dictated what the multiple is.....just that it be documented and adhered to.....for Microsoft, the multiplier might be lower (or higher) than that of Starbucks. Even if the multipliers are the same, it probably makes sense for the CEO of Microsoft to be paid more than the CEO of Starbucks since the market cap for MS is close to 6X that of Starbucks.... But regardless, the idea is just that it be documented. If the CEO needs a raise, it's because the company is doing better --- which means that everyone deserves a raise.
More concrete example:
Lowest wage is $25k
CIO multiplier is 100 (for a salary of $2.5M)
CEO multiplier is 400 (for a salary of $10M)
If the company does well, typically, the bottom guy gets another $1,000.....but the CEO usually sees a raise from $10M to $20M. With the cap limitation, the only way to get the CEO up to $20M is to raise the bottom guy up to $50K. If the company didn't do enough better to justify that, then the CEO doesn't deserve to double his salary.
At the top tier (VP, Pres, CxO), pay should be capped as some (documented) multiplier of the lowest level salary. Bonuses should be tied to company performance. That's it. If the CIO wants to get paid more, he either needs to raise the rates of those below him or improve the performance of the company in some meaningful way. When a company making billions pays its executives $50M but lays off thousands making $40K, it feels really crappy. Sure, I understand that sometimes those layoffs boost performance and what not, but there really is a point where having MORE money doesn't really do much for you.......whereas losing your job is VERY disruptive.
Purely bogus argument. The counter is "put it in the database because it allows you to change out the front end". Both are stupid arguments because when you get around to rewriting anything, you're going to rewrite both layers. [Caveat for a company that sells their software -- having all of the code in one layer allows you to sell to more clients.]
Put the code in the right place. For large / massive data processing updates or crunching reports, the database is much more performant than doing it in the front-end code. For CRUD actions, having the work be performed in the front end makes the app more responsive.
I'm an application developer who has extensive experience as a database developer (not a DBA). I'm in favor of implementing keys and relationships to ensure that your data remains pure (bad data is one of the biggest reasons that analytics is "hard"). I'm also in favor of triggers and stored procedures if it makes sense in the context of the application. But I'm not opposed to reading a set of data into memory and looping over it when it makes sense as well.
In my area, I can actually opt to have Earthlink as my ISP instead of TWC. Earthlink offers a similar service level using the same lines that TWC laid. If I paid Earthlink for my connection, Earthlink would keep some portion and then pay TWC for use of the lines. That's more or less how deregulated power companies operate.
De-regulation along the lines of the power companies? In other words, break apart "generation" and "distribution"......make TV/broadband one entity and then make the lines themselves a different entity. Have the distribution entity charge customers the same rate scale so that other companies can compete on equal footing.
Until each electron, proton, and neutron needs an address......and each quark....etc.
Yay for common sense (both you and Anonymous above). I run Windows....I have nothing against Linux, but working in Windows pays the bills. I patch regularly, I browse intelligently....and I haven't had a virus on *MY* machine since the Ping-Pong virus back in the DOS days.........(that was a cool virus, BTW).
Open Source isn't a cure-all. Neither is Closed Source. User behavior and knowledge is the best cure-all.
Solution: You don't get both a copyright and a trade secret.....just like you don't get a patent and a trade secret. [Maybe you mean a Trade Mark which is yet another form of IP.]
Coke has never released their formula. If you are smart enough to figure it out, you can make your own Coke. They won't patent it because then you'd be able to clone it for cheaper. They haven't copyrighted it because that would require it to be published somewhere. If someone broke in and released their formula, they could sue for the actual theft, but once the knowledge was out in the public, they couldn't do anything to anyone using that knowledge.
Agreed. As a development environment, I really dislike Eclipse. The Visual Studio tool line is great (whether you like MS or not, it's a very developer-friendly tool). Eclipse is very cumbersome to use and seems to take forever for tasks that shouldn't. While I like that it's flexible, I'd rather just use Notepad++ and a command line compiler than run Eclipse.
I'd be more inclined to go this route...if hired as a contractor, then self-evaluate whether your contract lasts longer than it would take to rewrite. If it takes longer to rewrite, communicate the problems and just triage as best you can unless they offer to extend the contract. If you have the time, refactor as you enhance so that you balance a rewrite with getting features completed.
Agreed, The people who are best at [subject X] are those that have a passion for [subject X]. When I interview people for (programming related) jobs, I focus less on what they actually know and more on whether they have a love for it (do they do programming related stuff on their own either for fun or self-improvement, etc.). Even if they don't have the skill I need immediately, I know that they will ramp up quickly and be more productive than someone who went into computer science because it was a high paying job.
If you are setting it up, you could have discreet records individually encrypted. One row correctly encrypted and (some number) of rows of fake data encrypted with a false key. Without knowing which row is good and which row is bad, an attacker would get (some number) of potential keys that return realistic but wrong data. They wouldn't need to run my decryption routines to generate these false positives.
By average of $500 / year, I mean over the six year period that corresponds to the lifespan of a console. Year one when you buy a machine. Year two when you upgrade the video card. Year three when you upgrade the CPU and RAM. Year four when you upgrade the motherboard. Etc. Over a six year period, you'll easily spend $3,000 on gaming equipment.....probably more.
While I agree that a PC that costs the same as a console is generally more performant, one of the benefits of the console world is that the upgrade cycle (in other words frequency of cash outlay) is a lot longer. In PC gaming, you are likely spending on average $500/year to keep up. In the console world, you spend once every 6 years or so. For those of us on a tighter budget, knowing that if I buy a console near the beginning of the cycle, I will still be getting similar performance near the end of the cycle. Game developers can target a known platform and optimize accordingly.
And yet, if I implement the same type of feature (with no knowledge of the magic sauce), I'm in violation of the patent.....even though it was obvious enough for me to come up with the same solution. Either the patent should include everything you need in order to implement the solution (so that I know when I'm violating it), or it shouldn't be a patent.
I'd also like software patents to have a working implementation which is what's actually covered by the patent.....much like physical patents. If I patent "sorting" (and yes, many software patents are that vague), it doesn't allow for bubble sort, selection sort, insert sort, quicksort, etc.