i see what you're saying, but i have a different perspective

compare to music

if i listen to an album alot, eventually my friends/family will hear it...if they like it, that's one more listener/customer/concergoer for the band

same with FOSS, imho

if i use GIMP and Audacity to make pixel/art for an Instagram to promote my graphic design side job, that's the same thing

"all images made by GIMP"

now, if you want to be over-litteral, i guess you could say that it's not *the act of using* but the "evangelism" that happens *when it is used*

so in that sense i guess we could agree

care to elaborate?

I think just using the software counts as "participating in the community"

GIMP is a good example...

Winamp spread this way

we could have nitpicky, obtuse discussions about this question for infinity

we all know what the word "expert" means...and in this quiz it's the highest of many other options

if we ditch the semantics and just look at the math "expert" is just a label for the highest skill level

there's always a "highest" and this is the chosen word...it fits the common usages of the word, so it's a decent choice

totallly

all code is instructions excuted by a machine in real time

the "scripting" disctinction is used to differentiate *within* that closed system...it's a type of command and over time users have found the distinction useful linguistically...

sort of like an animal trail that gets worn in...coders have to distinguish between functions of languages so that's how it evolved

i think you should count it...it's like golf...you use to be pro-level and you're not going to just forget that ability

however the tech passes you by...but the learning curve is very short...

y'all could crank out a smartphone app way better than 80% of the shit out there if you tried i bet

most programmers don't get the opportunity to work closely with a real expert/master

this is a hugely un-addressed issue in computing across the board

imho, this can also explain *alot* of why we have fewer female coders/programmers!!!

i'd rate you as Expert.

i put myself as Intermediate but what's funny is, even by your criteria i'd probably still be intermediate

i'm at that point where it's all just semantic differences between languages i use...the text is like a forrest i have to hack through to get the machine to do what i want

it's true, no social media system gives you "total control"

but then just sending IP packets over the internet gives your IP service provider "total control" of any of that data, so if that's your standard you can't really use the internet at all

tl:dr - use whatever internet system that has the functions and control of your data that matches your requirements

First, employers are not demanding LinkedIn pages or broadly looking down upon applicants without a facebook...and the idea that they mentioned it in an employment situation, with all the laws in place about fair hiring, *multiple times*...it seems like exaggeration...

However, the question of what kind/how much of your life to share on the internet is definitely a worthy question.

The answer is the understand the function and complexity of the system, the internet in this case. Facebook is one system of many. It has characteristics. One is the default to "sharing".

Instagram is another system...it has less information and simpler controls on "sharing"

**your instagram or twitter can hook into your facebook**

so, a person could use exclusively Instagram, Twitter or even a blog of their own creation, and have it **auto-post** to facebook...thereby having dynamic content on their page without ever going to facebook.com regularly.

the answer is CONTROL

what "social media" internet system should you use?

the one that has the FUNCTIONS you need and gives YOU the CONTROL over your data at a level you are comfortable with

if IBM can make a value proposition in China with PPC, they actually have a chance at getting some market share outside embedded.

yes i agree

from TFA summary: "because the government has been actively pushing homegrown solutions over foreign technology, "

China is serious about this.

They are wise to the level of embedded spyware and also the way companies will lock you into proprietary everything.

Also, it's a wise move from an IT perspective. Especially for something as huge as China, pushing "homegrown solutions" on that economy of scale is a major change and it will have a noticalbly positive effect.

"Like turning an Aircraft Carrier"...that's China's IT infrastructure...it's so huge, it takes a long time to turn, so your criteria for deciding to change course is different...also the consequences of when you do change course are orders of magnitude different

as per my understanding, a person who asks this kind of question would choose "functional programming"

correct?

do you mean something akin to 'data-driven programming' described here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D... ?

maybe an example of the code you use can help me...you do games...so probably some in-house variation of...?

I voted "whatever works for the job" but from a philosophical standpoint, functional programming is the right choice.

I'm talking purely theoretical here...not real-life cases but thinking about what the best could be.

Functional programming is, to my understanding, a kind of rejection of abstraction ontologies as a problem solving method instead focusing on instruction as the paradigm.

Machines following instructions for given parameters. That's the most logical, simple, and elegant starting point.

A real world example: the high frequency trading software is written in Erlang

Electrical engineering is not in decline.

As tech advances we will need more engineers than ever. Outsourcing is not a solution here...it's low quality work that hurts your home market.

Here's the problem: ontology.

The distinctions between "electrical engineering" and "software engineering" are breaking down because so much of engineering work is software.

Look at astronomy. All astronomers are radio astronomers now. That doesn't mean we still don't need 'old-fashioned' regular-light astronomy skills...just that today's astronomer needs different skills than before.

It's still astronomy.

It's still engineering.