Are you suggesting that Cook should not speak out against any social issue until he fully researches how the issue is handled everywhere in the world and only after he has prepared a complete response that is all-encompassing?

Fiorina's statement is a standard deflection technique to change focus from the good things an opponent does to something less good.

If you trust him, work through his last days as usual, just switch him to hand-over tasks instead of new work.

If you don't trust him, walk him out now and revoke all access.

Good thing you know that we don't do unit testing... otherwise where we we learn that we were doing it wrong? Are you also going to assuming we don't do everything else I don't mention? I re-read my post and I can't find any part of it that could be used to infer that unit testing isn't part of our process.

Also, if you leave code review until after the product has passed all testing phases, then you have two problems. First, if you change anything after the code review, then you're not done testing, so the only way to do code review last is to magically have code that always zooms through code review with no comments. Second, you'll never get approval to fix more than a trivial amount of code if the pointy-haired boss knows the customer has already signed off; that's the classic path to being forced support bad code.

in these cases, "doesn't work" is a matter of interpretation. It's usually a defect or omission in the spec.

You can usually make good fast without much effort. It's often hard to make fast code good. Prioritizing speed above all else is a recipe for disaster.

Whether it works is orthogonal to quality. Good code can be fixed easily, so good code is always a short distance from "it works". Bad code can quickly go from "it works" to "it doesn't work and I don't know why" with just a simple change in requirements.

One of my rules is that the customer is the judge of whether is works or not, but the team is the judge of whether it is good or not. If the only person to evaluate the product is the customer, then you are pretty much guaranteed to have bad code. Code quality management comes before testing in the form of design reviews, code reviews, standards, pair programming, etc...

But, the main use of cracked offline passwords is to use that password on other services. The current service is already compromised as the person doing offline cracking has the database already. As long as you don't re-use passwords, it doesn't matter that much.

Hammond likes American cars - and he likes them for what they are, not just when they pretend to be European cars. He even gave the Dodge Challenger a good review for being a fun to drive muscle car, even though it's not a very good car from a statistics perspective.

All candidates had to go through HR. HR only had two approved vendors for the "IT Contractors" category. We had over four thousand IT contractors on staff at any one time company wide. My group hired about fifteen per year. With this much contracting, there was still more of a focus on cutting costs by reducing vendor count than on getting quality candidates. Both of the contract vendors were type that says "Ohhh... you're not from India, we'll just put you on the bottom of the pile".

Tried that. Most of the candidates said they were the primary developer using a technology that, after two minutes of questioning, they had obviously never used before. I had several instances where the person I interviewed wasn't the person that showed up for the job.

The perceived wisdom is still correct as long as you don't make a grievous implementation error in one of the two things you are comparing. All that they demonstrated is "It is possible to do memory access so badly that it's slower than disk".

It's dumber than that. They didn't even do it right in Java. There is a note near the end of the paper that says "However, using a mutable data type such as StringBuilder or StringBuffer dramatically improved the results". They didn't present the numbers, but what they really meant was "The performance problems we saw were entirely due to our not using StringBuilder or StringBuffer, this paper shows no meaningful difference in performance between memory-then-disk and disk-only access once the algorithm is fixed."

I used to do a lot of contractor hiring. I started with the attitude "if you lie on your resume, I won't even consider you". After realizing that I would never hire anyone - I backed off on the attitude. The interview process became an exercise in determining what the candidate knows, while the candidate made every attempt possible to deceive me. It was very disheartening and I hated hiring someone who lied to my face for 60 minutes straight because he lied less than everyone else and was the most likely of the bunch to get the job done.

BTW, this was at a really big company and 99% of the resumes that HR sent me were educated in India and came to the US to work in the previous three to five years.

They went through a lot of effort to get hydro power from Niagara Falls without ruining the tourist attraction factor. Instead of turning it into a dam, a three square mile reservoir was built and water is diverted from the upper river to this reservoir (mostly) at night. During the day, the dam creates energy by draining the reservoir into the lower river. No part of the power generation system is within a mile of the falls itself.

... but that's highly subjective. The fact that the FTC decided the practices are deceptive is what made them illegal. They were just anti-consumer behaviors before the FTC looked into it.