For guitar, it's called Rocksmith. Fun game. For voice, there are a number of games that do that already. I'm a lousy singer, so couldn't list off the names of those games as I've never bought them, but I see them any time I go into a game store.
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).
I actually disagree. Writing things down or recording them is great, because we forget. I always thought it was a little nuts to go to events and spend them taking pictures, videos, etc. BE there, don't be the videographer. As time has gone by, though, I've come to realize if I had all those artifacts to refresh my memory over the years, I'd remember them a lot better.
An uncle died when I was 7. Great guy, I remember that. I remember what he looked like, but in my mind, he looks a exactly like the picture on my grandmother's wall, so I think I've lost any real memory of his face. I replaced it with the version I see a few times a year. I have no idea what his voice sounded like even though I used to see him all the time.
So yes, go do wonderful things, but also take pictures and make videos. If you were my dad, I'd appreciate that gift, especially later in life, and not just for the wisdom, just for the memories.
Nothing about preparing videos for his daughter implies that he's NOT spending time with her now.
For those who don't have kids, you can't spend every waking minute with them. They don't even WANT that. I have a very young child who sometimes just wants time with mommy. Sometimes she wants me and not mommy. As they get older, kids spend time with friends and their own interests (note that the OP's child is in 6th grade). I suspect there's plenty of time to record videos when the daughter is doing other things, not home, etc.
ATM machines have built in redundancy. At least when you call them ATM machines. (Automated Teller Machine machines?)
I'm engaging in some deliberate hyperbole. I think a lot of people, when they think of the 10xers, think "oh, like me". No, not like you. Most likely not like anyone you've ever met. Your Tiger Woods analogy is spot on.
A LOT of people play a pretty good guitar. A LOT of people sing well. There are darned few actual rock stars.
so for anyone thinking rockstars pornstars or coked up overweight perl jockeys with poor attendance and a penchant for lashing out at coworkers in a 10 am alcohol fueled rage are in need of some kind of dedicated legion of cocksuckers to treat them like a special snowflake, get bent.
Those are, by definition, not the 10x-ers. They're problems or prima donnas, and best shown the door quickly. It's the ones who are pleasant, or at least reasonable, to work with and still have productivity that are way beyond the norm. THOSE are the rock stars. Personally, I think they're like R.O.U.S.es. I don't think they exist. I've met some great coders who are probably 2x as good as the average "good" coder, and some bad ones who just really shouldn't have been doing the job, but 10x? I've never seen one.
If you don't know that it's HIPAA, not "HIPPA", you are probably not qualified to say when it applies.
Or is researching something a family member, friend, acquantance, etc has.
I'm fortunate to be healthy as the proverbial horse, but people I know have come down with some nasties lately, and I've done some research to try to understand their conditions.
Assuming people only read about ailments they have is rather stupid.
Rolling in his grave would be a pretty damn weird thing to do, him still being alive and all...
Gotta agree with sribe. The best way to build apps is to have a magic box you can just feed a description of what you want to do into the app.
The problem is, the magic box will ask you lots of questions you didn't think about. You'll have to answer "What should the app do when (unexpected thing) happens?" "What about (error case)?" Et cetera. Source code ends up being a precise and concise way to describe what you want a program to do. Sometimes you can accelerate it using libraries, CASE tools, 4GLs, etc, but only if they actually support the thing you want to do. For a while, it was promised that programming would be as simple as linking a bunch of boxes in a GUI. I did that, and it was great as long as there were boxes that did what you want. If there weren't, there was an API and a manual for creating your own boxes...in C.
Didn't we have this very debate not long ago?
No, we shouldn't teach everybody to code. We don't teach everybody to balance their own checkbook, or why credit cards with a 29% interest rate are a bad thing. Let's start there. We need basic financial literacy. We need basic scientific literacy. Let's get there, and maybe then teach everybody to code.
I'd just buy a spare cable.
They are still called phones because that is the primary reason most people carry them around. It may not be what they use it for the most, but it is still the core reason a person owns it.
I don't think it is. I had a dumbphone and upgraded to a smartphone because I wanted a mobile web platform in my pocket. It happened to make my dumbphone unnecessary, so I no longer carry one. I, at least, did not buy a smartphone because I needed a cell phone. I *had* a cell phone already.
A $700 smart phone is, too. Here in
Calling it a phone is also a misnomer. It's a small computer that also makes phone calls. If all you want to do is make phone calls, buy a dumbphone. Having a moderately powerful, always connected computer in my pocket is nice--but admittedly, it's still a luxury.
This issue is at the core of a lot of misunderstandings about security in general I see. People expect to be able to solve security problems by creating a framework of rules. Sometimes they're societal rules (aka laws), sometimes they're software like writing a client that can only access a server in a particular way, and assuming no one can access your server in a way not supported by your client (hint: other people can write code, too).
Writing rules won't keep people intent on harm from flying drones at things they want to damage. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to figure out how to keep those drones from doing damage EVEN WHEN they aren't following the rules.
A Phalanx-style interceptor with beanbags would probably work, and be comically appropriate for a threat posed by glorified toy helicopters.