Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Or just practicing for an actual job (Score 1) 320

by ADRA (#48368991) Attached to: Duke: No Mercy For CS 201 Cheaters Who Don't Turn Selves In By Wednesday

Would using frameworks make you a cheater? Would copying a very know pattern (as a Pair/Triple) deem you a cheater (even if you attributed it, like I often did both in school and in professional life)? If you read a help site that says do A, B, C , D and you do the same operation of steps exactly (regardless of copy/paste), is that cheating?

If you want to stomp out cheaters, come up with problem domains with very unique and strange processes that wouldn't be found in the wild. If you want to bust someone for leveraging a well known, legally OK use of a tool, you might as well stop issuing CS-diplomas and start issuing CS-that-won't-function-in-the-real-world-diplomas.

Maybe the better appeal woud be an official citation system so that you can prove sources in an adequite way. Most courses in Uni have soime sort of standardized attribution system, why not CS?

Comment: Re:Why are Asians always ignored in this discussio (Score 1) 458

by ADRA (#48361147) Attached to: Black IT Pros On (Lack Of) Racial Diversity In Tech

Because people like to complain about their perceived natural handicaps more than breaking out of them.

20-30 years from now when Asians dominate actual tech innovation (if they haven't already) and all the lazy white guys like myself will be slagging the 'yellow guys stealing my job', or insert some other out group who I feel threatened of.

Racial / religious / sexual / etc.. intolerance happens, I try to avoid it like the plague but the only way to truly overcome is on a personal level. Donate money to outreach and education programs if you think it'll help (i'm doubtful) or be the shining image of what -insert said minority- can be by outshining your peers and FORCE them to recognize your achievements. Is it hard? Sure, but to assume no handicaps in this world is to welcome a very disappointing life. I'll welcome the world when we're all born with the same opportunities, but I'm not deluded enough to assume it'll happen in my lifetime.

Comment: Uh (Score 4, Insightful) 112

by ADRA (#48341097) Attached to: Amazon's Echo Chamber

Netflix made 71m off of the 'there's no money to be made slinging content' game, and who knows how much Apple makes off music, either in content distribution or hardware. Yes, they made a product less desirable for their market and they're paying for that mistake, oh well.

Comment: Re:Emphasis on "for-profit"? (Score 2, Insightful) 331

by ADRA (#48282631) Attached to: Colleges Face New 'Gainful Employment' Regulations For Student Loans

While we're at it, lets get rid of mandatory food labelling and mandatory car air bags. Lets get rid of all this nanny state BS and just do what the hell we want. Oh, you like those things? Well too bad, test your food yourself, and buy opt into the expensive life saving features option during your next car purchase. If you aren't a genious, then you're a fucking moron. Everything is quite clearly all or nothing in this world, you know?

Comment: Re:Disturbing (Score 1) 331

by ADRA (#48282441) Attached to: Colleges Face New 'Gainful Employment' Regulations For Student Loans

Yes, I'm saying that student loans that stick to you through much of your adult life is a very bad idea in supporting a healthy society. If you enter a program under the assumption of getting $X at the end of the program, one can plan and budget a rational justification for taking the course. Now if you assume the graduation is significantly less than 100% and employment rates for graduates are very low, would that same assumption apply? Would me as the 18 year old kid picking his program know the employment prospects when I walked into professional life (assuming for a minute that the 2-4 years in between don't dramatically change the local/national job prospects for said profession)?

If said student decides that the risks are too great to enter school, the alternative is that the only ones going to high end schools are those who can afford the programs. All of a sudden, we're back to a hundred years ago, and high education is for rich people and the workers can have their professional apprenticing.

How about this, as a possible alternative *just spit balling here*

Post a mandatory employment survey for all recipient of government funding on a per school/program. The survery is as follows:
        - Are you working in the field you specifically went to school with (Y/N)
        - If different from your program, name said profession (unemployed, student, home maker, hospitality, etc..)
        - Gross Income per month
The survey is to be completed annually for the life of your loan term.

For all programs that want funding, they should provide:
      - Mean/Average/Deviation of all student's gross incomes at year 1 / 5 / 10 as a rolling average of the last 5 years' result prior
      - % of students that graduate (rolling average of the last 5 years' result prior)
      - % of students that transfer into other programs (and list the top transfer options)
      - List of the top transfer programs and the % of students who moved

At 17, I was told by literally everyone that getting into university was the best way to achieve a good job in life. It was that or 'vocational schools' if I wanted to be a carpenter or something(pass), or work at McDonalds the rest of my life. Framing one's entire life off the experiences of those around you is a big step, and if you were 100% prepared for your life at 18, I absolutely salute you for it. But government is for the people (as a whole) and for every person at 18 that knew exactly what they were getting into, there are probably another 10 who don't know what they fuck they're going to do in this lifetime.

Worse, the government supports it by paying a chunk of everyone's money for their experience. It justifiable to assume that the government's financial role in education is geared toward the best interests of society as a whole, hence spending money where it can have the most benefit, so sinking a ton of money into programs known to have horrible track records seems sensible to me.

Comment: Crap in/crap out (Score 1, Interesting) 265

by ADRA (#48263217) Attached to: Apple Pay Competitor CurrentC Breached

Just CHIP-IN-PIN and be done with it. Tech is amazing at making a mountain out of shit and calling it a better alternative.

Chip-in-pin works with basically every merchant systems, credit card processor, and Bank (or will sooner or later). The fees are dependent on the credit source.
      - If the merchant accepts credit cards at all, the credit card fees are built into the cost of the product NO MATTER WHAT (unless they're defrauding the contract of the CC by offering discounts)
      - If you pay with debit cards / cash, you pay for the CC fees and its just more net profit for company
      - Liability for CC's are on retailers, and at least recourse, buying limits, and some government insurance on checking accounts
      - I'd like my bank / CC provider to send notifications on every purchase made either through email (login to actually view info) or SMS / application

All that's left is the new vacuum of change that is flooding into the credit market to fill their pockets during the current industry volatility caused by the death of magstrip / signature and the rise of internet based buying patterns (significantly increasing). Google/Apple/CurrentC/Amazon/PayPal/etc.. all want their hedge into the market so that they can make money from your purchases. They're not altruistic, and their sole benefit for SOME are convenience (but not for me. I like chip-in-pin).

I see room for existing technologies to evolve (mostly to fix the broken internet buying based security limitations) but I don't see myself using google, apple or anyone else in a retail setting besides a recognized merchant service/(credit card for insullation maybe)/bank because hell, the fees are already there and built in, so I may as well use what I'm being charged for anyways, plus I get the reassurance that I know it works (and has for a very long time).

Comment: Re:Irrelevant (Score 2) 113

by ADRA (#48251459) Attached to: Microsoft Works On Windows For ARM-Based Servers

Windows has been mostly architecturally portable since NT was released. The fact that they're debating supporting ARM's for their server cores is more interesting because it means their main consumer Windows OS could also run on ARM tablets / netbooks now, which I think has more viability for them. Having their managed code stack and applications that can be binary portable between underlying OS architectures would be the BIG win Microsoft should've done originally when they released their tablet-lite versions of software.

Comment: You guys (Score 4, Interesting) 148

by ADRA (#48174893) Attached to: Cisco Exec: Turnover In Engineering No Problem

I may just be interpretting this discussion different than everyone else here, but assuming every developer is happy with company, and company decides to implement a new development philosophy or production model (for strategic / financial / etc..) reasons, wouldn't it be sensible and actually expected that a non-trivial number of developers won't be happy with said changes?

For example, If my company went from Dev and IT groups to merging them into devops, some people are going to be rocking the idea, and a shit ton may be unhappy about the change and decide to move on. DevOps isn't any more or any less better for an employee, but it means a different set of tasks for that developer to live in. Maybe this change will significantly improve workplace productivity and the change isn't only merited, but essential for the company's survival. Same with, say dropping support for Windows/Linux/Mac/etcc OS's and just supporting a smaller set of OS's. Some would say there are valid reasons to adopt the standard (less IT burdens), and others who use said dropped OS's will be more willing to leave.

To assume that the company simply doesn't care about its developers walking out is a little bit of an overstatement. Many won't like a change (regardless of what it is), and if you're going to leave, you might as well leave when you perceive a negative change in your job.

Recent research has tended to show that the Abominable No-Man is being replaced by the Prohibitive Procrastinator. -- C.N. Parkinson

Working...