Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:I'm with Jeff Atwood on this (Score 1) 169

My high school offered it as an elective and my brother convinced me to take it my sophomore year (I was already interested in engineering, just wasn't sure what field). Out of the entire nearly 2000 students there was ONE class (both CS 1 and CS 2 combined) with less than 50 people taking it over the course of 3 years. There were about 8 of us that were actually any good, out of them I believe 3 (including myself) turned it into a career. The rest pretty much cheated off us or we had to help them through the assignments and tests. Our teacher was very aware of this and didn't have much choice but to curve things and ignore the cheating otherwise most of the class would have bombed out.

My senior year I had completed the 2 allowed years of the class, but I was still on the programming team for the school so I was somewhat involved with the new class that year. We had a large group of AP students that realized they could take the elective to improve their GPA (since AP classes were weighted higher), so they did. I had 90% of the class coming to me for help and most of them even by the end of the year straight up said they have no idea how I even understood most of the class, much less excelled. The first two weeks consisted of alternative number bases and how to do math in them, their minds were collectively blown (admittedly mine was when I first learned about binary too) and they had serious problems getting a handle on that within the first semester. These were people in the top 10% of my graduating class at a NATIONALLY RANKED public high school (several of them were in the top 20). They were not idiots by any stretch, but even they had problems just comprehending the subject...

Comment Re: In three years ... (Score 1) 169

Pretty spot on. I keep hearing this parroted over and over again and it seems to gain steam more from people that don't understand the engineering involved in proper programming. The best example I have heard is cars are ubiquitous in our society but does that mean everyone needs to learn how to work on them? I can drive a car, extremely well even, without having hardly any clue how it actually operates. Even if we teach "baseline" programming skills, so? What is the end game?

I didn't learn enough in high school to do much beyond create a few small scale applications, games, and scripts that were not of much use to anyone but me (and even then, they weren't major improvements). After college, different story but I majored in CS and now work as a full time software engineer. Even people getting into the field at entry level have issues making a proper application from the ground up. You want to see bug riddled applications that are security nightmares and totally unmaintainable? Let someone who has the high school level of education try to write a basic application and that is what you will get. Hell I remember going to UIL competitions and hearing people from other schools who had 2 years in a CS program start asking 'Alright, now what are these class things again?'

This 'programming should be a basic skill' crap needs to stop. Half of it boils down to companies hoping to flood the market with cheap labor to drive software developers wages down, but it won't happen. They want top skill for bottom dollar. Instead we will end up with a mess of people that know just enough to be dangerous and fuck things up repeatedly because they were 'taught this as a basic skill!'

Some people are much better at it than others, doesn't make a software developer any smarter or more intelligent than those that are not good at it, it is just a different skillset. Other engineering disciplines are equally as intelligent as I am, but I have electrical engineers in my office that fucking program PLCs still not able to grasp everything that my software does... Hell even opposite end of the spectrum with people doing liberal arts work, I've known English majors that I would consider down right brilliant, but they didn't know a damn thing about programming and some said they couldn't learn if they tried...

Bottom line, dumbass talking heads and politicians need to shut up about things they don't understand. And the ass holes at tech companies that keep spouting this needs to be taught to everyone are mostly just greedy. Not saying all though, some programs are actually geared toward giving opportunity to those that wouldn't even have it, but they are not trying to shove it down the populations throat.

Comment Wired or $$$ (Score 1) 158

Most of the solutions for this sort of thing I have done involve wired HDMI extenders over Cat6 and a wireless USB mouse/keyboard. There are "wireless" solutions but all of them are way overpriced for residential use and many are limited in application because they HOG bandwidth. Technically you can do it, but it won't be very responsive without using ac wifi. I personally ran my own extender to do this at my house, was actually really easy to do with some fish tape/firebreak drill bits. That is what I would recommend and just make it modular so you can use the outlet jacks for whatever (I actually set mine up to have keystones in the wall and at the top of the attic boards where they come out so you can move the actual cable between wall jack without splicing and re-terminating constantly).

Comment Re:Just GBE everywhere! (Score 1) 557

Standard Cat6 is not that much more expensive than Cat5e and has the extra headroom for go up to 10 gbps later on (I'm thinking like 30+ years ahead type of thing). While Cat6A or 'Cat7' would be literally triple the cost for the same amount (I'm not kidding at all I was able to get 1000 feet for about $150 and my buddy who gets pricing through AT&T gets Cat6A at $450 for 1000 feet). Your standard household probably doesn't have a need for over 1, but considering MY network is actually being designed for in home media streaming, VPNing and a development network on the side etc., yes I actually can utilize 10 in the future if it becomes standard.

That said, its hard to predict what the future may hold even for a standard consumer need in a standard household, and for a minimal cost increase on Cat6, I would just go ahead and use it. The installation isn't that difficult (punch down and crimp on Cat6 certified RJ45 plugs and connectors is really quick, no different than Cat5e to Cat5e connectors) and you are covered in case a need does arise later. Achieving the proper distance for full speeds isn't really that hard either, very few homes are going to have 150 to 200+ feet runs where you would actually lose speed if conditions are not right. Even in my long ass house I only have one run that goes over 150, and its only by 15 feet.

Comment Re:Just GBE everywhere! (Score 2) 557

Cat7 is not considered a true standard yet as TIA does not recognize it. Not only that it is extremely expensive for only a minimal upgrade from Cat6A (which is a huge pain to work with, I have some of it). Very few homes would need 100m run of cable that needs to run at 10 gbps and Cat7 anything is REALLY expensive (so is Cat6A to be fair). Many standard pieces are also not made to support wiring that thick, I have enough issues trying to crimp a Cat6A cable (with connectors that are rated for 6A even...). No reason to use Cat7 especially when it is difficult to ensure it is actually following that "standard." Now the conduit access is a good idea so you can run extra cables or later on replace them, but no need to run anything more than standard Cat6 imho.

Comment Re:Just GBE everywhere! (Score 1) 557

I've been working on the cat6 upgrade in my house for a bit now and I found three to be a good number for almost all rooms (a few varied from that). One for a main PC, one for TV (lots of providers have boxes with ethernet jacks in them), and one to allow for a small unmanaged switch to use if the room needs more expansion. My logic was basically only two devices really could use full gigabit speeds (even then the TV could be done with a lot less if you have a router that can handle the traffic correctly), the rest should easily be able to exist with ~100 mbps if the switch is filled (I have a bunch of eight ports I got for free). Even if more bandwidth is needed, the switch/router is the limiting factor in speeds since I kept all the runs within proper limits for 10 gbps speeds and consumer won't have/need/want those for a while.

Few of the rooms I ran extra, such as centrally there will be APs for wireless only devices and guests, but three is pretty much the smartest number I came up with. Plus with three wires you can comfortably drop them through a 3/4'' hole (9/16'' if you REALLY want to tug) so that you minimize how big a hole you put in structural supports. The firebreaks made it a pain for me, but a $35 drill bit from Home Depot fixed that and keeps it in code technically I think (although firebreaks are not required where I live, mine are just nice fluff from the original home builder).

Comment Re:Easy fix (Score 1) 247

And to elaborate on the issue I described above, we did have to come up with a work-around and/or support staff in the interim while the issue was being fixed. Was an agonizing time dealing with all that especially with the number of people I had to talk to just to get the information I needed to troubleshoot the problem and the damn thing at first seemingly happened at random with very little debugging logs to show it.

Comment Re:Easy fix (Score 2) 247

While true, there is also the problem that many of the families and people that bought that car had no idea there was a risk like this. At what point is there a cutoff? Many people will take risks like that to save money, but not all (maybe not even a majority). Is it really fair for them to make that decision for these people? I mean they even knew that almost every time it happened people would get killed. There is a huge difference in "this could cause a problem with operation of the vehicle" and "this will probably get someone killed". That to me is not taking reasonable precautions and is very unethical.

Comment Re:Easy fix (Score 1) 247

In the particular case we talked about how poorly Ford handled the issue after it was reported and specifically how instances of catastrophic failure need to be dealt with differently. The biggest take-away was the fact that when people started making the claim that the gas tank being punctured was causing the fatal fires, Ford tried to flat deny and cover up the problem. I would bet personally the engineers were not doing that, although we specifically talked about ethically they should have come forward.

I do acknowledge your point of basically hindsight is 20/20, but I would argue that even though this problem was a "rare" occurrence it should have been fixed due to the possible result. I have had things like this come up just doing software (not so much to the fatal degree, though when working on HMIs that actually can become fatal software issues...) where we found a severe issue that was rare but would cause a complete failure.

In the admittedly limited instances when this occurred regardless of the cost we had to fix it. I had one such bug make it into production not long ago (it was even legacy code) and I spent literally 4 months working on it to find out it was a problem in the lower API we were requested to use to fit in with the customers system infrastructure. There was no hesitation to fix it either, we found it, knew it would be tough (was a thread locking issue) and had to dive right in.

To me it is very strange with automobiles how they seem to be held to a different standard as far as severe safety issues like that. If a civil engineer makes a mistake like that the engineer and their company will get sued back to the stone ages, but automotive gets a pass a lot of the time... The Pinto case is one of the examples where they actually had to pay for their serious mistake and terrible handling of it upon discovery.

Uncertain fortune is thoroughly mastered by the equity of the calculation. - Blaise Pascal