None of those things had a video display....

But I get your point..

We just need TERM LIMITS for all Elected Federal offices. I figure give them 12 years in congress max. After that send them packing for home. This Strom Thurmond's 47 years, and Ted Kennedy's 40 years stuff has got to stop.

He knows less about coding than my Grandma who just now figured out this touch tone dialing thingy... (Forget the cell phone and that pesky "send" button..)

That's not saying much... Biden generally knows nothing (or perhaps cannot remember anything) about guns or any other subject he goes into public to talk about. He's an old guy who has lied for a living so long he knows no other way, and now he's loosing what was left of his mind and is struggling to keep his story straight enough to get though the current speech without contradicting himself twice in the same paragraph.

I'll say this, Biden is the one major reason I'd never support impeachment of Obama and why I pray he stays alive well past 2016. Biden is off his rocker and off the rails and he cannot remember from one moment to the next what he's said. We are better off with the current president than Biden, maybe not much, but enough I'm not willing to risk Biden.

Naw, they just used a really accurate ruler, made each measurement 10 times and averaged their results...

You make an excellent point. There is no indication in the fine article about how accurate their results could be statistically, and given their really small sample size it doesn't seem likely 4 significant digits is justified.

You are more right than you know. Where writing software is a skill that most can develop, the really good developers are more a cross between engineers and artists. They are more like architects, where the form and function are both of high importance because having software that "works" (in that it does everything required [engineering]) and having software that is "workable" (in that it is easy to use [artist]) are worlds apart. Finding developers that do both engineering and art is rare.

It's not just the GUI interface, but ANY "interface" that needs to be usable, functional, simple to understand and complete. Designing an interface that works is easy, making it functional and simple to understand is much harder, and then making sure it is complete (does enough, but not too much to make it complex) is the real art.

Now my boss is going to be watching the developer's eye movements instead of testing code... This will not end well.

There is no magic bullet and where this might find the sections of code that your developer finds difficult to understand, it still isn't going to give you any idea about the quality of the code they produce. All you will know is how hard they concentrated when producing it.

I remember when we watched SLOC, but it was of marginal value. Then it was logical edges and complexity which was sometimes useful, but not always. Now they want to use biometrics to figure out how complex I find my code? It won't be any more helpful than complexity was.

Keeping code understandable and bug free has always been about naming identifiers, formatting, comments and using standard patterns and TESTING it as much as possible. All these golden bullets will only end up in your foot if you choose to use them....

I'm a customer... I don't care.. I'm getting ready to stop the mail side of my subscription anyway.

Let me see.. We are due then? Last major crash was 2008 and it's 2014.

You might be right....

Yea, well, I guess that it's better that we know where it ended up, unlike some airliners in recent history...

So? Look, there are two possible approaches to security here and you don't need a fully encrypted VPN link between two buildings to have a secure link. You could just put your own wire between the two locations and protect the wire from unauthorized physical access.

I'd not suggest you put sensitive financial data on the internet "in the clear", but if you are sure the physical link is only available to your intended destination, you can safely send all the data you want in the clear. If you look at the configurations being used, what was really happening was the exchange was in one room and the traders had platforms in another room near by. They had short physical connections, which, unlike the internet, are easy to physically secure.

Misses what point?

I think you missed my point. I'm not condoning some behavior as "minor" and therefor not worthy of attention, but a "hostile work environment" is not the same as sexual assault and rape and when you combine the two into one in an effort to show how pervasive this problem is, you cheapen the really serious, and weaken your real argument.

I've posted elsewhere that we ALL (men, women etc) need to be aware of this issue in the work place and take steps to intervene and avoid these kinds of problems. When we see somebody not acting professionally on the job or when we step over the line ourselves we need to DEAL with it, sooner rather than later. We also need to look out for each other. I'll give you an example...

I was sent on a business trip with two associates, a man and a woman. We where overseas. My female co-worker and I had hotel rooms on the same floor and she often needed to use my company calling card to phone home so we where knocking on each others door from time to time to pass the card back and forth. I never entered her room, nor let her enter mine. Both us guys were available when she needed to go places after work hours and offered to escort her for safety reasons. Not because she couldn't take care of herself (she was a self defense instructor), we where just all looking out for each other. I've done the same thing on many business trips with co-workers.

And that's just to illustrate that we all need to be looking out for each other, even at work. You may not like working with somebody, but the professional thing (and the right thing) to do is be looking out for the folks you work with and quickly deal with harmful situations as they arise and avoid them when possible. So that means dealing with "hostile work environments" before they become a pattern, dealing with harassment quickly and instituting a culture that discourages such behavior.

But my point is grouping rape in the same bin as an occasional off color joke does not serve the case all that well and only serves to make light of the really serious offense.

Not to mention that it cheapens the really serious offenses like rape and repeated harassment when they are grouped in with telling a suggestive joke once or forwarding a suggestive E-mail.

Offending someone is one thing (and should be avoided) but doing actual harm is quite another. Let's not group them together.

Yes, I would expect that in general a gigabit fiber link would be lower latency than a 1.5Mb/s ADSL link.

I don't think I disagree with your last statement. Except to say that there are reasons for higher bandwidth links to be lower latency which are related to the actual time it takes to get a data packet physically on and off the link (which was what I originally claimed) AND for other reasons which are not directly related to the link's speed (bandwidth). In order of increasing importance:

1. Link propagation delay (Cannot go faster than the speed of light, so how long is that path? If you have a satellite hop to a geostationary connection and back, you have a LOT of latency dictated by physics alone.)

2. Physical throughput/Bandwidth (how fast can we encode and decode data on the physical links).

3. Congestion in Switching (Higher throughput means less "store and forward" is happening. Buffering data increases latency.)

4. Number of network hops (Each hop means the packet got taken off the wire and put on another, which takes time. Routers look at the data, which takes even more time. Higher bandwidth equipment usually has faster hardware too.)

5. Driver/System software delays (Kernel time of the operating system. Higher bandwidth usually come with faster hardware and processors.)

So are we good?

How can that be given the dire predictions that have been made? Certainly if man made GW was real there would be no doubt as to the affects it caused, yet here is the unvarnished truth. "We just don't know which areas and how much influence" GW may cause or has already caused (to paraphrase your comment above). Even without knowing though, you are willing to proclaim that things will get worse. I'm not so willing to just accept the party line until there is evidence that we know enough to predict with some known level of accuracy what's going to happen from some climate model or simulation. All we've proven so far is that our models suck for predicting the future.

Idiots abound, that much is certain. But I'm not so sure about one-sided science. I've seen some pretty good science on both sides. What we really have is once side who wants to claim the question is settled calling the other side names. Global Warming has become a social issue, more than a scientific one, which is dangerous to *real* science. We haven't had any lynchings or mobs burning deniers at the stake yet, but we are approaching that level of intolerance within the idiot community you mention. Thoughtful science that doesn't support the accepted "fact" is not tolerated, but dismissed outright. Which is a sad state of affairs for the real scientific community and exposes them for what they really are... Human like the rest of us..