In the years I've done Java development, the only times I've never had a problem building on Windows or OS X and deploying to Solaris or Linux was when someone used hard-coded paths or didn't make the program's deployment properly configurable for deployment to the target OS. Write once, run anywhere is more or less true with Java.
You're well-positioned to do Puppet, Docker, continuous integration and all sorts of things that support a team. A year doing that while you sort it out will just help you call yourself a full stack developer.
Do a bit on the hypocrisy of most of GTA's critics who went apoplectic over the possibility of violence against women versus the mandatory violence (in myriad forms) against men.
(Sorta like how the reaction to what Ramsay Bolton did to Theon Greyjoy just made him a "bad, bad man" but coercing Sansa Stark into consummating their marriage made him Worse Than Hitler)
I'm a millennial. Many of my generation express themselves with less eloquence on social media than you'd find among third world students where English is a third language. What they need is someone to tell them that they don't give a fried-in-the-sun rat shit how they express themselves-that if they want to be treated like they have an opinion more valuable than that of a coked out hamster-they'd better shape up.
At this point, anyone who uses hard drugs in the US is doing so after years of being told all of the nasty things they do to your body. There's no curing that level of stupid. There's a percentage of the population that in the absence of morphine, will abuse bath salts and model glue. No law can fix that complete lack of long term thinking.
This sort of abuse is rampant with the ADA. It's designed to be abused because it allows private parties to sue in a weird not quite Qui Tam type lawsuit to get people to fix up their buildings. In fact, there are disabled people who make a living by parasitically going from store to store suing the Hell out of small businesses like this.
Is greater accessibility good? Yeah, but it should be brought about through tax credits and government officials initiating action. The money recovered should go into coffers to fund tax credits for businesses that want/need help complying, not lining some disabled, lawyer-loving parasite's wallet or writing a private attorney's paycheck.
Code.org board member Brad Smith, Microsoft's General Counsel, proposed the idea of "producing a crisis" to advance Microsoft's "two-pronged" National Talent Strategy to increase K-12 CS education and the number of H-1B visas.
We identify all students with "leadership potential" and put them into either a class on business administration or JROTC. What could possibly be the objection there? Don't we also have a shortage of good management? Classes on leading and managing civilians or getting a taste for being a NCO or commissioned officer would do wonders to make more young folks ready to lead others in the business world!
What's that you say? That would dilute the wages of management/make a lot of competition for upper management?
Shit, son, why do you hate America? If diluted wages are good for engineers, how much better are they for the people who lead them!
A few years working on a chain gang in the deep south cleaning up highways would do wonders to make most identity thieves think twice.
Rich, decadent countries always face a decline in their traditional religion. On an international level, the picture is quite different with Islam and Christianity rapidly gaining adherents throughout the developing world.
This isn't the first time that the public started moving away from Christianity. Reports from the time before the black plague spoke of the irreligiosity of the average person and there were similar events in the 5th and 6th century. When the US's foreign policy and economic chickens come home to roost, I suspect you'll see a lot of people turning back to religion instead of consumerism for meaning in their lives.
Philip Zimbardo isnt doing science on this, hes regurgitating talking points from evangelical american christian leadership. porn addiction, insufficient masculinity, and "the vidja games" are all bitchcraft perfected by the likes of James Dobson and focus on the family as surrogates for their collective concern that america is "changing" and they dont like it.
Believe it or not, many of us who are orthodox (not Eastern Orthodox, just tradition-focused conservatives) Christians would more or less agree with you here. Focus on the Family actually puts out some rancid garbage on relationships, basically encouraging young men to be simpering "nice guys" who act like they're unworthy of the woman in their life. They can't stand the idea of men standing up, having a mission (which may genuinely never include marriage and a family) and living how they want to live within the limits of morality.
MGTOW and other reactions are actually not controversial among orthodox Christians because unlike modern Evangelicals, we understand that there's nothing contrary to God's plan about men not getting married. In fact, we would tell many young men that it's better to not get married at all than to get married to a woman who is not willing to be a real wife (whether she has a job or stays at home). The reality is that many, many women do not want to be wives today so it's better to simply not get married than to be shackled to that.
And they can't even back torrents of full HTML dumps of the various wiki* sites.
I'm a pretty young (31 years old) Java EE developer doing mainly Groovy and Grails. I've worked with plenty of older developers in this space and found that they're either up to date with Java or think experience is "I've done the same JavaEE since 2002 and by God it still works so it must be good."
levies high penalties against those offering "material support" to terrorists
Providing material support to terrorists should be illegal. That the concept can be abused by aggressive prosecutors is obviously a problem, but then any legal concept can be abused. I had a friend who is known as a kind and gentle soul, who was seen being attacked by a woman who rushed him and assaulted him and was prosecuted for assault and battery because he pushed her away from him. Pushed, not body slammed. So should we get rid of assault and battery or should we disbar the son of a bitch who brought charges which the facts on the ground collected at the time didn't support?
Were it not for the first amendment, there's no doubt in my mind that the people yelling "triggering!" at Christina Hoff Sommers at Oberlin would have sought her prosecution under a law like this. There is a not so fine line that many ignore between opposing cyberbullying and coddling pathetic little weaklings who simply cannot stomach the idea that there are people who hold different, maybe even offensive, views. My view as a free speech partisan is that "safe spaces" need to be smashed as aggressively as the concept of "free speech zones." If someone simply will not leave you alone, that's harassment and warrants a basic sanction under the law. However, no one has a right to not be annoyed or hear things upsetting to them. We as a society should be utterly intolerant of people who expect to be protected from such things. It should be a mark of scorn and shame to be that thin-skinned and publicly notorious for being so.
Ireland is risking a very serious mistake that will hollow out much of its claim to being an open and democratic society if this is passed.
I'm a Christian as well. The state recognizing other religions is fine with me and most conservative Christians I know. Their existence and lawful activity is a fact of American life. I have no problem with the state recognizing other religions equally in this capacity because religion is a major part of public life and ignoring it is in fact giving favoritism to atheism, not neutrality.
I also think Scientology should not be recognized as a religion because there is a documentation trail showing that it was deliberately created as a fraud by Hubbard. To my knowledge, no other religion in the US can be accused of that. That is a legitimate basis for the state not granting it protection under the first amendment.