Anybody who uses Kindles to read DRM'd books has no appreciation for knowledge or art
So... is it DRM or the Kindle itself that removes the ability to appreciate knowledge or art? FWIW, I don't own a kindle, but I think buying one and using it would not change my level of appreciation.
and any author who relies on this customer base is making a grave mistake.
All authors should be elitists who only let the right kind of people read their books?
I think there might be an Eclipse option. We had a new guy once who had some IDE auto-committing. He had a ridiculous number of completely uninformative commits early on. Very quickly the top item on his task list became "Figure out how to disable auto-commit"
Seconded. I lost about 15 pounds last time I was unemployed.
So he starts off with stuff about how he's feeling old and the surest sign of it is bitching about "kids these days".
You need to have read more of Joel's writing. That's just his irreverent style.
I didn't have a problem with that part. I felt that his age DOES show, but that's not why.
His premise is that, in order to be a good programmer, you need the right kind of metal aptitude which is a you-either-have-it-or-you-don't thing and not a skill that can be learned. While there may be other ways to test for that aptitude, his claim is that one sure-fire way to test for it is the ability to understand pointers.
I get his premise. I just think he's wrong.
I worked with a guy who understood pointers. He was a brilliant guy. He was also a terrible programmer. His code was universally unintelligble -- and before anyone claims the fault was on my end, it's not. I was the guy in the office who understood pointers better than he did. He would write shell scripts and awk, and they were just as unintelligble. They weren't a case of being so clever that lesser minds struggled with them. They were just complicated in needless ways. Other guys on staff could modify his code and make it both more efficient and more readable in one shot.
When interviewing potential hires, I'm more concerned with how they break down a problem than anything else. I've hired guys to do C, Java, perl, and ruby among others. I'm not perfect, but better than 90% of the time I give a guy the green light he turns out to be solid.
Started reading, because I'm usually happy to read a well written rant about why java sucks. I'm not exactly a fan myself.
So he starts off with stuff about how he's feeling old and the surest sign of it is bitching about "kids these days". He's wrong. That's not the surest sign. This was:
Instead what I'd like to claim is that Java is not, generally, a hard enough programming language that it can be used to discriminate between great programmers and mediocre programmers.
Got to that point and decided that it's an obviously unsupportable premise. Read a little bit more, and my takeaway is that Joel doesn't know how to spot a good programmer unless they're working in C.
Auncle?
I didn't actually see it until it was available for free on demand on some service or other that my cable provider has. And I realized very early on that I wanted to skip all the Anakin/Padme scenes. Moderately watchable that way.
I look forward to the day MS names a product that.
Agreed. My conclusion from the data is that github is getting more mainstream.
I looked at this: http://www.factcheck.org/2008/... and a wikipedia page about it.
Did a little more digging, I was halfway right. The meat of it was that the recount methodology that Gore requested was actually one of the least beneficial scenarios for his side.
Gore lost on every recount. Get over it.
Yes, every single one. Don't forget that Gore tried to goose the results by having only Dem heavy counties recounted rather than the entire state.
One last thing that just about no one knows about. All of the major news outlets proclaimed Florida to Gore before voting was finished in Florida. Florida resides in two time zones and the northwest "handle" of Florida is heavily Republican. Many voters left lines while voting was open once Florida was called for Gore. IF that hadn't have happened, the recount wouldn't have been close at all.
As I recall, the Bush camp wanted one recount method, and the Gore camp wanted a different one, and under the rules they each proposed, the other side would have won.
If there's a door there, it should open. If it won't open, there shouldn't be a door there. How hard is this? Putting a door there that's never going to open just frustrates the player and destroys the suspension of disbelief. It reminds them that they're not really in this world they can see, they're in some arbitrarily limited construct devised by a "product manager" at some company to try to screw a few bob out of them.
What kind of world do you live in that you're able to open every single door you see? You actually believe that is realistic? Especially for games like the original Half Life, set in this huge commercial / industrial type top secret research setting. I would expect that EVERY door would be locked by default!
The complaint is more that IRL, there is *some way* of opening every door out there. Most of the time it's out of simple respect of what a locked door indicates that you don't even try. The rest of the time it's usually that the effort isn't worth it. But it's totally possible to open every single door in, say, a hotel. In many games, doors are just decorative, despite that there's an implication of something behind it.
Customers were not charged retroactively for the discounted amounts, but their bills were "corrected on a moving-forward basis."
This part doesn't make sense to me, obviously these customers were just as active in defrauding Comcast, they should be required to pay the money they owe at a minimum, criminal charges seems more appropriate. Why play favorites? They're equally guilty as the perpetrators of the scam. Without them, the scam wouldn't have worked.
Probably because some of them were legitimately handled by the employee in question, and determining actual liability on each and every one of them would be prohibitively expensive. Would be my guess.
Why do people have such a hard time spelling "definitely"? Is it that hard?
I know what you mean. It drives me nuts. It's defiantly not that hard to spell.
He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion
