It isn't always about primitives--bubble sorts, linked lists and the like. Theory deals far more broadly.

You would be surprised to see how many interviews you can cut short by asking questions like: "what is the purpose of inheritance in OOP?" or, "You are told that you are going to be assigned to a project involving a number of technologies for which you currently have no knowledge. How would you prepare?"

Self-taught, while not always, usually means all syntax and APIs but precious little theory except that which is obtained through osmosis. Due to the "you don't know what you don't know" factor this limits not only the domain of problems that can be solved but the efficiency, robustness and maintainability of their solutions. Most often they reflect a focus on too many trees and far too few forests. A reflection similar to their decision to try to shortcut their way around the prerequisite of a formal education.

Mean while anyone having to work with them or their products is forced to waste time waiting for the reinvention wheels as well as fixing or working around their messes.

Learning syntax and APIs are one thing. Maybe you're particularly adept at that. However, this is only a fraction of what makes a good software engineer. Theory is critical to their application. The development of robust, efficient, and maintainable software more than just knowing how to mash the keyboard and hit "compile". The theory of application for those APIs, the theory underlying data structures and algorithms, theories of architecture, etc.. With out these your projects will suffer as you constantly reinvent the wheel and "learn from your mistakes." Yet, those who went the self-teaching route most often skip the theory, skip the mental exercise, narrowly focusing on syntax and APIs.

I'm not saying a college degree is a perfect accommodation for producing best of breed software engineers. I think many colleges are missing the mark on providing necessary experiences encountered by those in the trenches. So much of the course work feels like bringing a tank to a knife fight and it provides a distorted sense of reality that undermines the point of what they're learning.

The mandate would force everyone onto the network and provide a common attack surface. I can't wait for the fun to begin. Here's a teaser.

I'm not sure how Slashdot became a place for shopping advice but... This really isn't that hard. Most places such as Amazon, Newegg, etc. have customer reviews. Select from the ones having large number of overwhelmingly good reviews. As an FYI, particularly with phones, OEM batteries are in many (most?) cases salvaged from used devices, and are not new. If you insist on going the with OEM batteries, then only buy from the OEM unless customer reviews provide a compelling case otherwise.

CCl4 otherwise known as R-10 in the HVAC world, is a coolant and is a precursor to R-11 and R-12. Both of which happily decompose to CCl4.

Actually you are. Take a nice hot shower (no exhaust fan, closed doors) and tell me what happens to your mirrors, walls, floor and ceiling.

The alternative sources of carbon based fuels doesn't increase pollution, just changes where we're getting the goods. Domestic production provides for some flexibility and reduced dependency upon middle-east and other traditional and problematic sources. It would have been nice to deal with the pollution thing too, but at least it was a step forward on other issues.

That distribution of ability made perfect sense. An initiate magic user pays the greatest price of all classes. As such they should be compensated accordingly for the risk and sacrifice as their character develops.

Regardless of the author's misinformation/FUD campaign, this seems pretty damn easy to test. Throw the suspected best implementation(s) up on some micro-sats and see what they push. The British guy, plus two independently verified alternative implementations all showing something weird going on ought to be enough to merit a proper and definitive experiment or two.

It seems to me that it is the equivalent of a mix tape which (at least in the US) I thought had already been established as fair use and thus legal. It's when you create copies of copies that you step into legality issues.

If not Google, then who? Pick your poison, for you will be tracked, mined, engineered. You have little choice in the matter save for the overt actors involved.

All is and will be Android.

I find that most people trying to argue against math generally are doing so by asserting that if a certain math is not put to practice in the software that a person is developing that that math is unnecessary. It also seems to be commonly asserted that persons with a strong mathematical background are just being pretentious.

I believe that the anti-math crowd is missing the point. For a software developer it isn't the skill of solving calculus problems, but the skills required to solve calculus problems. What I mean by this is that in order to work to a solution for a given mathematical problem you are exercising many other skills. Skills such as logic, abstraction, visualization, etc. are very much employed in software development. You go to the gym not because you have aspirations of mastering a bench press, but because you aspire for a stronger, healthier body. Mathematics are an example of exercise equipment for a software developer.