That depends... I still see some bias from some areas when it comes to developers over 40... And not all of it is unfounded. A lot of developers my age don't look and won't take the time to learn new tooling. Many have lives and either won't take or aren't given the time at work to keep up. Software development evolves at a very rapid pace.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
It's the only thing holding me back.
Adobe Reader causes me more problems than any other component, be it hardware, software, user, regulation, or program. This piece of software is such a POS, riddled with backdoors, bugs, "features", bad updates and other crashy nonsense that it makes me want to buy shares of Adobe so that I can burn them & then piss on the ashes.
Well, I personally take the view that any society that forcibly sterilized 50% of its residents doesn't deserve to continue as a society.
I also don't think Malthus was correct.
Someone insinuated that I'd be ok with Jewish concentration camps if that resulted in a society that survived.
That's a hard question to answer. On one hand, what was done to the Jews was clearly immoral. On the other hand, a society that goes extinct isn't around to argue that it was a moral society. Heinlein noted that survival is somewhat of a precursor to moral behavior.
What we'd like to hope is that the choice between survival and violence against others is a false choice - that there is always a way to both survive and not harm others.
But that may not be the case for all societies in all situations.
It may be that the Native Americans came to the conclusion that you did -- that anything beyond a certain population was unsustainable given the technology level and resources they had available to them.
That may have been an eminently moral choice.
It also means that what they thought doesn't matter today - because there weren't enough of them to defend themselves against an invading society with different ideas.
Another question to wrestle with:
Why didn't the colonization and empire building go the other direction?
Why weren't the native Americans launching ocean going vessels towards Europe? Why, when the Europeans arrived, were the NAs unable to repel them?
Why were there so many top-notch German scientists and engineers in that society in the 1930s and 1940s? Why, given its amazing technological advantages, did Nazi Germany still ultimately lose the war?
If you want a really uncomfortable question: why was South Africa apparently a much nicer place -- for everyone -- under European management with the distasteful Apartheid policy? Why has that society _regressed_ since kicking out the colonial invaders?
There are books on these topics that take varying points of view.
My point is very simple: pining for primitive cultures is romantically appealing but intellectually dishonest. And holding our ancestors to the standards of today is also silly - we can only hold them to the standards of their day --- unless you mean to imply that there has been no human progress.
It is precisely the fact that the Western world has shown dramatic human progress - even at the cost of slowing its own rate of expansion and conquest - that we can be confident that Western Civilization has something to offer the world.
I don't believe that inside Nazi Germany nor in Stalinist Russia, there was the problem of a foreign empire clashing with an indigenous culture.
It seems the best American analogue to the experiences of those regimes was what was done to Japanese Americans in WW2 - which while awful, thankfully, doesn't hold a candle to what was done to the German Jews or the Soviet victims of Stalinism.
The history of the world is filled with violent tribal conflict, usually over the right to settle and tax a given piece of land.
The Jews and Nazis weren't fighting for control over Bavaria.
The Europeans did not set out with the goal of exterminating the native Americans. The NAs had their land taken from them by force, which is how it has always worked on this planet.
There are two general possibilities for how to proceed from here
1) convince people that taking land from other people is immoral
2) find additional land that is both unsettled and desirable
#1 is worth working on, and can show some real improvements, but will ultimately not be enough.
#2 is also worth working on, and why I am a space nutter, and why I am interested in how seasteading plays out.
A mix of #1 and #2 may help humanity not kill each other completely. We've gone almost 70 years with the ability to wipe ourselves out and we haven't done so yet. That's an encouraging indicator.
Small Part Native American here. Grandpa and mom are buried on the Res.
Not that my heritage should matter, but some people can't hear the message until they've decided what bucket to put the messenger in....
How is the way of life and/or world view of the Native Americans worth saving?
Same question for impoverished rural Africans?
We are having this conversation only because an objectively superior culture with an objectively superior propensity for technical development has built this amazing medium for our use.
My ancestors were excellent hunters, excellent farmers, and excellent stewards of natural resources. There are many things to admire and respect about what they did.
Ultimately, however, I'm glad I don't live in a house made of animal skin; I'm glad I have modern medicine; I'm glad my other ancestors - my white European ones - have shot themselves into space, and have opened a way for my children to someday get off this rock.
In many ways, Humans of all colors and shapes are still participating in the tribal violence that shaped native Americans and still shapes many Africans.
Some tribes are better run than others, with better results to show for it. Adapt or die.
We should just bolt solar panels to the blades of the windmill.
And then bolt copies of that windmill to the tips of an even bigger windmill that's ALSO covered in solar panels.
On top of a hydro dam!
With an underground fission reactor that uses the reservoir lake as a cooling loop!
With natural gas backup generators!
AND LIT BY COAL FIRED LAMPS DEAR GOD I THINK I JUST SOLVED THE WORLD'S ENERGY CRISIS
I... didn't sleep one minute last night.
I suspect that we could persuade those caches to flush to RAM, simply by exhausting the number of possible lines for that address - if the cache is set-associative. Of course modern processors have multiple levels of cache, so that makes it harder.
This is sort of self-contradictory, so I don't really need to respond to it directly. I just want to point one thing out. I can't afford to work for any company as less than a C-level employee. It would be a salary cut from my current business.
Not to mention that I'd not like it.
An AC talking about balls. Pathetic.
Right. I didn't even bother responding to the taunts.
Coward really means coward. I am sorry for the folks who are afraid that their employer will take a dislike of what they post, but for them we have handles.
I can't say I'm happy about what's happened to Debian. Having Ubuntu as a commercial derivative really has been the kiss of death for it, not that there were not other problems. It strikes me that the kernel team has done better for its lack of a constitution and elections, and Linus' ability to tell someone to screw off. I even got to tell him to screw off when he was dumping on 'Tridge over Bitkeeper. Somehow, that stuff works.
IMO, don't create a happy inclusive project team full of respect for each other. Hand-pick the geniuses and let them fight. You get better code in the end.
This actually has something to do with why so many people hate Systemd. It turns out that Systemd is professional-quality work done by competent salaried engineers. Our problem with it is that we're used to beautiful code made by geniuses. Going all of the way back to DMR.
It really does look like Jomo did post this article, and it refers to another article of his.
What isn't to like about Ubuntu is that it's a commercial project with a significant unpaid staff. Once in a while I make a point of telling the unpaid staff that there really are better ways that they could be helping Free Software.
It's just that I object folks who would be good community contributors being lured into being unpaid employees instead.
Say how do feel about idiots working for corporations contractually enmeshed with the US military-industrial-surveillance complex. Why no spittle-laced hate for them?
The GNU Radio project was funded in part by a United States intelligence agency. They paid good money and the result is under GPL. What's not to like?