Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Slashdot Deals: Prep for the CompTIA A+ certification exam. Save 95% on the CompTIA IT Certification Bundle ×

Comment Re:Photoshop / Lightroom anxiety (Score 1) 421

It's a long-shot, but maybe WINE will run Adobe Creative Suite (but probably not).

That being said, Richard Stallman saw this coming a long time ago. After years of thinking he was a crackpot, I eventually understood his perspective when he said that it's better to use a Free program with fewer features than a proprietary one with more features. After getting the rug pulled out from under me too many times by proprietary software, I went purely FOSS in 1999. I sometimes have to be creative in my solutions, but I don't consider that to be a bad thing. And my freedom is worth it.

Windows 10/Adobe Creative Suite is a case study in what I have come to accept as Stallman's fundamental truth on the matter, and is the rule of proprietary software rather than the exception.

Comment Re:Simple methodology (Score 1) 347

One would hope that a good manager would have enough practical and direct experience in writing software to at least come up with a half-decent estimate, no?

No.

I've been writing software for 30 years, and I have never calculated an estimate that was even remotely accurate. Every project is unique, and must be treated as if it has never been done before (which it hasn't). Time estimates are snake oil sales.

[unrelated rant]

I hate, Hate, HATE, HATE!!!!! Slashdot's forum rules. Who has the time to wait a billion years between postings?! Who's the moron who comes up with this shit?! I registered at soylentnews.org a few days ago, and this stupid Slashdot notice:

Slow Down Cowboy!

Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.

It's been 3 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment

is the last straw. I've been on Slashdot for about 18 years now, I think, and I've had it with all the stupid site decisions of the last couple years. I'm done with Slashdot. This is my last posting to Slashdot. Hello, Soylent News!

[/unrelated rant]

Comment Re:Hard to believe (Score 1) 166

And [Microsoft has] done some great work on a lot of software engineering fronts, including secure development, powerful tools, integrations, and are even dabbling in open source,[sic]

Only until they can find a way to subvert it. Don't let Microsoft's current worries confuse you into thinking that that company has changed in any way, shape, or form. The moment Microsoft management think the coast is clear, they will drive their hidden knives into your back. It's one of the few things Microsoft does well.

Comment Re:Bad Advice (Score 1) 286

How is this in contradiction of the age old advice?

Is that representative of who you are? Are those things that represent your personality, or are you just doing those things because someone told you to do them? What happens when you are on your own? Or are you going to look on the Internet hoping to find an answer to every one of your life choices?

If it's not how you would have portrayed yourself, you're going to lose when you're on your own and have to stand on your own personality. You will eventually expose yourself as a fraud.

Make your own decisions about how to show who you really are, and be true to who you are and what you want in a lifelong mate. This article is a "Getting Started In Gaming The System" guide, which is the same as projecting yourself as a liar. I wouldn't have wanted any woman who was attracted to that, regardless of how much I thought I would have been happy with a woman who was attracted to that.

Comment Bad Advice (Score 5, Insightful) 286

Anyone who follows this advice deserves what they get.

The age old advice still stands: be yourself.

If someone wants you for who you're not, rather than who you are, you are better off just moving on. Here's what I posted on my blog years ago after marrying a wonderful woman I met on Plenty of Fish:

I was recently reading the front page of plentyoffish.com, a dating web site where my wife and I first met (we recreated a joint account to submit a testimonial), that provided a very long, detailed opinion piece to a young man about how to behave in order to win a girl that he was very attracted to. It was from a so-called dating expert, and contained some of the worst drivel that men cling to in hopes of landing a wife.

The given advice was to act distant, indifferent, and aloof; that showering her with affection made him look desperate and goofy. We men turn to this kind of garbage when we're not having much luck with women. We turn to this crap when we actually do become desperate.

It took me a long time to realize what should have been self-evident all along: the old advice of just being yourself is, by far, the best advice you could possibly get. Being yourself isn't intended to improve upon the quantity of women you attract. It is intended to improve upon the quality of women you attract. Not surprisingly, the exact same advice applies equally to women. Don't follow those stupid "rules" such as not making the first move. All those rules are complete and utter crap, and will just make you even more miserable than you already are.

All the little head games and misdirections that you have learned are intended to achieve one thing: a brief relationship. They are not the doorway to a lasting marriage, but rather just the path to multiple meaningless disappointments. You will not be able to maintain the charade you have built, and will always fail in the long run. She will always see through you eventually. You will eventually slip up and expose yourself for the fraud you are, and you will be back to square one.

If she is not interested in who you really are, then you do not want her (regardless of what your hormones may tell you). It doesn't matter how pretty, gorgeous, sexy, or otherwise desirable she may seem. If she is not attracted to who and what you are, then any meaningful relationship with her is doomed. She will eventually (but usually quickly) tire of you, and move on to the next guy.

I am a software developer, and spend most of my time in front of a computer. When I was dating, I tried hard to hide that from my dates. All the advice I had been given was that women were turned off by the kind of geeky guy who spent that much time with his computer. I tried to list other interests on the dating site (tenuous as those interests were), tried focusing on what I thought women wanted, and every other trick I could think of that was even remotely true (and some that were very much not true when I reached a certain point of disillusion). Maintaining the illusion was very difficult, as that isn't who I am.

In the end, it was those very traits that my wife tells me were the most attractive to her. It turns out that her life had been full of too much stress, anxiety, and drama. An easy-going, caring, intelligent, homebody of a man is exactly what she had been looking for, and couldn't find, for a very long time (we were both in our late 30's). She would not have been at all interested in the man I had tried pretending to be, but was hopelessly in love with the man I actually am. Who we really are is what allows us to connect on a very deep, lasting level.

It took us both a very long time to find each other (strictly speaking, she found me), and we both suffered some horrible emotional scarring in our prior lives apart, but that scarring is what allowed us to appreciate what we have together.

So although it may hurt in the short term, it's better to be rejected by women for who you are than to be accepted by women for who you are not. You will eventually find that woman who will love you for who you are, even if you have to go through many painful rejections along the way. The women who accept you for who they want you to be will always desert you. No exceptions.

Comment Re:If they don't allow it... (Score 2) 166

That said, open source is probably the closest the world has ever gotten to true communism.

Communism is centralized control of production. Free Software and Open Source are exactly the opposite. Patents and copyrights are much closer to Communism, as the Government issues directions for who gets to produce stuff.

Comment Re:What will change now? (Score 4, Insightful) 411

I still have visions of layers of adapter classes, which serve absolutely no purpose other than to appease Java.

Those adapter classes exist to make interfaces with lots of methods easier to manage. I've learned and forgotten many languages over my 30 years of programming, but Java is one of those elegant languages that makes programming pleasant. The only thing I truly hate about it is the stupid memory limits imposed by its early life for applets. That one thing makes desktop programming more irritating than it needs to be.

Comment Re:Same answer every time. (Score 4, Informative) 178

Once you give your data to "the cloud" it ceases to be YOUR data.

It boggles my mind that people still haven't caught on to this. I'm going to expand on your message just a little bit:

Once you give your data to "the cloud", it becomes the property of government snooping agencies. It doesn't even matter if you're in a country that doesn't actively snoop (if you believe that such a thing exists anymore). Companies change hands, and they do so across political boundaries. Companies cannot be trusted with your data. Period.

Hopefully, this little incident opens some eyes.

Comment Re:How is this an AI? (Score 2) 187

I don't understand how this poetry generator constitutes an AI.

That's because it doesn't. This program is on the same complexity scale as chapter 2 or 3 in an introduction to programming book, when it reaches the concept of variables. It's an exercise in triviality, not artificial intelligence.

Comment Re:mod parent up (Score 0, Troll) 253

Parent is actually insightful.

No, he's not. He is completely ignorant of history. Even if you can't see it right now, there is trap hidden somewhere in Microsoft's actions. There is ALWAYS a hidden trap in any apparently-friendly action Microsoft takes. You either see it up front and avoid Microsoft like the plague that it is, or you fall victim to the trap after it's sprung.

Don't any of you remember Microsoft's last promise to not sue over Dot Net runtime patents?! On the surface, it seemed like Microsoft had turned a corner away from the Dark Side. But a closer analysis revealed that Microsoft's promise only extended to one very specific version of the Dot Net runtime, which was a version that was quickly superceded by the next version of the Dot Net runtime.

The trap was that we were meant to believe that we were covered by the patent pledge for the Dot Net runtime. However, if you tried to implement Microsoft's superceding version, the patent pledge no longer applied.

Rather than trying to figure out whether you're the dinner guest or the dinner in the wolf's lair, it's just far safer to stay away from the wolf altogether. No one ever got eaten by staying away from Microsoft.

Comment Re:Oh God, not again (Score 1) 740

Measles is one of several diseases that was nearly eradicated before the vaccine was introduced. The effectiveness of the Measles vaccine is based more on religious faith than on science.

The recent New York "outbreak" of 24 cases (only 24 cases, but whatever: we like a good hysterical response to a non-issue) consisted of 20 people who were vaccinated and 4 that were not. That does not speak well to the effectiveness of this particular vaccine, but does lend credence to the notion that good sanitation is more effective than the pharmaceutical cash grab that is modern vaccinations.

More damning of the Measles vaccine is that the source of the New York outbreak was a fully vaccinated person. Measles vaccinations seem a lot like snake oil.

We want to create puppets that pull their own strings. - Ann Marion

Working...