But as a parent you have to remember your responsibility, which is to prepare them for the real world, and that real world will be a bit mean. They must be able to rely on you completely, but you must also allow them to learn that mistakes aren't the end of the world, which means sometimes you have to let them make mistakes.

Also minor injuries are some of the fastest learning tools in the world.

There was a study done (which I can't find right now) that indicated that all the safety features had 0 impact on the overall safety of the roads. Ultimately a human is hard-wired with a specific risk tolerance, all you do by adding safety features is make them behave in a manner that will bring the risk tolerance back to where they are the most comfortable.

I can't find the exact study, but a related conversation:

http://www.autoobserver.com/2011/05/focus-on-safety-how-driving-rates-on-the-risk-thermostat.html

It is bad parenting, but it is also almost mandated at this point. We were in the suburbs and one of my older children realised he could get to the porch roof from his window in his room. Now, I pretty much spent most of my childhood on one type of roof or another (Barn, house, tree house, etc) from the time I was 8, it was fun and exciting. A neighbour spotted the kid on the porch roof (which wasn't even all that tall) before my wife had successfully removed them from said roof and read my wife the riot act and threatened to call the police and CPS.

Ultimately we had to lock the windows down, which is not something my parents (or probably any parents of people my age) would have ever thought to do. My father's first response was "If you break something don't come crying to me".

The entire push to use example.com (which I always thought was pretty dumb) was because foo.com or bar.com might actually exist and do something, therefore if your point is valid, the entire point of example.com is invalid.

Welcome to the Internet.

I was going to say not possible, then I saw how old my account was. :( Thanks for making me feel old.

Not completely true, a full time employee is a very large liability these days, you want to make sure they are going to fit before adding them to payroll. I'm not so sure I would do the hire multiple knowing you can only fill one position, but I have regularly used contract-to-hire.

Agreed, I never ding someone because they have certifications, however I also don't ding people for not having certifications unless the position requires one (usually a client-facing or public facing position that requires lots of letters after their name).

You do sound like a fun guy and pretty competent, however I have to say that any firmware upgrade SOP 101 is to have a copy of the current firmware available if something bad happens. It shouldn't be luck that you have a rollback plan for any type of upgrade.

That's not a very useful executive. At the point it has been proven to be outside of your control it is time to get the customer support team working with the client to help them talk to their ISP and provide as much information as possible so that they can tell the ISP what is wrong. This accomplishes the task of letting the client know that it is not related to your service. It also lets them know that even though it isn't your problem you are willing to help in any way you can.

If he/she just keeps yelling at a tech that can't solve the problem, you have a leadership problem that needs resolving.

Yelling is almost never useful, back when I was a manager or director I would let the executive know that we are working on it and let us do the job they pay us to do. I also found it helpful that if you are having a vendor issue, let the executive send an e-mail stating it is an urgent matter to your contact, this lets the executive be a hero and gives the vendor bargaining power to escalate the issue to their upper management.

During an incident the leadership should be maintaining calm so that the people doing the work are at their peak performance.

Odd timing, the laws just changed for HIPAA and HITECH

If each thread allocates its own memory then it is just returning to LWP, which was good a while back, but threading should try to avoid allocating its own memory except in a few specific instances.

However, based on this thread most people don't know how CPUs work.

Yes, most modern programmers do think that way based on most of the code I've seen in the past 10 years.

There are very few developers left in the US that even know what memory management is.

People don't even try anymore.

Nope, simple facts. The worst part is that it is a basic logic debate, the only reason HFCS is used in the USA (and almost nowhere else) is that we lobby for corn farmers.