If you consider engineering a process rather than results, it's only a joke to call it engineering in 80% of companies. I do engineering every day when I use an existing proven process to get a result, or use known solutions for security features, etc.
It's the people who ignore the known body of work who cause much of the trouble. And they seem to be in the majority. But it doesn't mean there is no software engineering being done.
"With records dating back to 1880, the combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces reached a record high for May, at 0.74C (1.33F) higher than the 20th century average. This surpassed the previous record high anomaly of 0.72C (1.30F) set in 2010."
You would expect records to be broken by small margins from time to time. I wonder if there was a record cold month in the past 15 or 20 years?
However, if I want to leave Time Warner Cable, I have no other wired broadband options. This is the case for most Americans.
That might be part of the confusion for me. We have Comcast and Verizon here as top tier carriers, and in the previous town I lived in lot of the immigrants used DirecTV for cable and used wireless internet. Maybe because I'm not really a big streaming fan this is just a problem that doesn't particularly affect me, or the internet scenarios I'm familiar with.
If ISPs were forced to remain separate from content services companies, this wouldn't happen.
How did Apple manage to win out against the wireless carriers? The biggest contribution they made, in my opinion, to the world of wireless internet was not the iPhone, but breaking out of the walled garden of "the content the carrier wanted you to see". I'm finding the situation with ISPs and online content analogous, and I'm wondering why the dynamic is so different. Perhaps the balkanization of paid content by distributors creates enough of a walled garden to begin with (compared to simple web access) that there are other issues preventing carriers from being forced by the market to be more open?
How are the parents supposed to make good choices? I realized when I was holding my son on my forearm, before he had a clue he had arms or legs, that I was going to be making innumerable decisions without really knowing what I was doing. I was going to make a very large number of bad decisions on the way. Considering how he's turned out, I'd say that I made the right decisions for the child and the situation often enough.
Sounds like you have a pretty good grasp on it. I'm not really sure what you're asking, though. I'm talking basic stuff here, like "contribute to the child'd financial support", "stay out of jail", "don't expose the child to drugs in-utero or ex-utero", "don't beat the child", "don't let my SO beat or molest the child", "feed the child", and so on.
If the question is whether it's better to send the child to piano lessons or karate class, that's at a much finer level of optimization.
I don't disagree completely. Probably a combination of me not knowing the right terminology and having a spouse who has dealt with specific cultures in an underperforming school district.
At the same time, there ARE cultures that start at a low SES and move up. Cultural traits play into that: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01...
"I've seen it. It's rubbish." -- Marvin the Paranoid Android