Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Mark Zuckerberg is a liar. (Score 1) 157

by s.petry (#47961783) Attached to: Mark Zuckerberg Throws Pal Joe Green Under the Tech Immigration Bus

Not only are you hiding facts, but attempting to offend as many people as possible in your fairy tale. I smell a big fat shill, but perhaps you are just trolling. Either way, claiming that the exception is the rule is asinine.

Most H1B workers are not making the same wage as Americans, but the wage is only a portion of the argument. Not even the right portion mind you.

The primary point is that Visa workers do take jobs from Citizens. That is not a question, that is a statement of fact. Citizens of any country should have priority in jobs in their own country. In fact all other countries in the world prioritizes their citizens over foreigners. They need to do so or their society begins to crumble like we have seen happening in the US for decades. (Don't "but but but" look at Wealth distribution in the US over the last 4 decades, look at median household income, and middle class wealth overall.).

A whole lot of a Visa workers treatment depends on where they are from (in addition to obviously who they are working for). I have seen both good and bad in Silicon valley, mostly good but the bad is very bad. Chinese workers with no chance of becoming a citizen seem to get the poor treatment. Indian and Russians that have a chance at citizenship seem to do well.

While I'm glad that you claim to be an exception to the rule, there are plenty of Visa workers that are not paid better than average and do have the visa hung over their head. You having an American spouse changes the equation quite a bit, and having children with that same spouse changes the equation drastically. I'm also guessing that you applied for citizenship. Interesting how you ignore those important facts, and go right to the insults and ad hominem. Hence, my statement that you are either a troll, or a shill. Most likely the latter.

Comment: Re:Jane/Lonny Eachus goes Sky Dragon Slayer (Score 1) 168

by Jane Q. Public (#47960759) Attached to: 3 Short Walking Breaks Can Reverse Harm From 3 Hours of Sitting

power in = electrical heating power + radiative power in from the chamber walls

NONSENSE. The power output is not dependent on the chamber walls, therefore the power input is not dependent on the chamber walls. You're contradicting yourself, trying to have it both ways.

Radiation from the cooler walls has no effect on the heat source whatsoever. This is a basic requirement of thermodynamics!

That's ridiculous, Jane. I'm just noting that the chamber walls are hotter than 0K, so they emit radiation into a boundary around the heat source. Therefore Jane's wrong to ignore that radiation when applying the principle of conservation of energy:

What's ridiculous is your constant repetition of this bullshit idea. Yes, the cooler walls radiate inward but they have no effect whatsoever on the heat source. ALL of that radiation is reflected or scattered by the heat source. (It is not transmitted because we're dealing with diffuse gray bodies of significant mass.)

If you're being honest, then it's really too bad that you still don't understand the clear implications of the Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law. But at the same time, it makes me wonder how you got your degree.

I'm done. If all you're going to do is keep repeating these incorrect assertions, after why they are incorrect has been clearly explained to you many times, this is indeed just a waste of my time. I set out to have a scientific discussion, not to argue about your religion.

Comment: Re:Methodologies are like religion (Score 5, Insightful) 81

by Jane Q. Public (#47957925) Attached to: 'Reactive' Development Turns 2.0

Methodologies are like religion

But this isn't a "methodology" at all. It's a statement of goals.

This isn't an "alternative to Agile", because it isn't a methodology. You can use Agile to achieve this "reactive system".

Frankly, it looks like a bunch of BS buzzwords to me. I write software to meet my customer's needs. "Reactive" attempts to define those needs... but NO, that's what the customer does.

This might be something good to show a client who wants a web site built, which you then proceed to build using Agile or some other methodology. But it isn't a methodology itself, and calling that thing a "Manifesto" is a joke.

"We want a machine that makes things cold. We don't care how it's built. We'll call this... The Refrigerator Manifesto".

Give me a frigging break. In fact I have to think this is actually somebody's idea of a joke.

Comment: Re:Jane/Lonny Eachus goes Sky Dragon Slayer (Score 1) 168

by Jane Q. Public (#47957775) Attached to: 3 Short Walking Breaks Can Reverse Harm From 3 Hours of Sitting
If you are sincere (you certainly haven't been acting like you are), then you must be postulating some kind of "tractor beam" effect that allows the chamber wall to "suck" power out of the heat source from a distance.

I assure you that at least at out current level of technology, we have not managed to build such a sucking device. The heat source radiates out what it radiates out, and nothing around it is "sucking" any power from it.

Although you seem to be doing your very best at "sucking" my time away over stupid bullshit.

Comment: Re:Jane/Lonny Eachus goes Sky Dragon Slayer (Score 1) 168

by Jane Q. Public (#47957743) Attached to: 3 Short Walking Breaks Can Reverse Harm From 3 Hours of Sitting

Jane's equation claims "none at all":

electrical power per square meter = (s)*(e)*Ta^4

NOW what kind of bullshit are you trying to pull?

Do you understand what NET means, or do you not? I assure you that a lot of people do. You claimed before that you did.

Why are you doing this? Are you really trying to make yourself look more ridiculous than before?

Since Jane's equation for required electrical power doesn't even include a term for radiation from the chamber walls, Jane's equation wrongly says that no radiation at all is absorbed by the source. None. Zero.

Repeat: this ASSUMPTION of yours that the chamber walls must be accounted for in the power requirement of the heat source is a direct violation of the Stefan-Boltzmann law. There are no 2 ways around it. Established physics (the Stefan-Boltzmann law) says that the radiative power out (and therefore power in) of a gray body is dependent ONLY on emissivity and thermodynamic temperature. It is completely unrelated to any nearby cooler bodies.

I'm going to ask you again: WHY do you continue to spout this violation-of-physics bullshit? What do you think you're accomplishing other than wasting my time?

I have concluded that is all you are trying to do.

Comment: Re:Really? (Score 1) 126

by Jane Q. Public (#47957649) Attached to: Next Android To Enable Local Encryption By Default Too, Says Google
It's only part of the problem. The REAL big part of the problem, is that Android (so far) has insisted that your encryption password and unlock code be the same.

So if you encrypt your phone with a secure password, like upper-and-lower-case, numbers, non-alphanumeric, and 10 characters long, then every time your phone is locked and it rings, you have to enter the entire damned thing before you can answer.

Understandably, not many people want to do that. It's a huge pain in the ass.

I don't have a problem so much with encryption being irreversible, but it should be separate from your unlock code.

Comment: Re:What a question? (Score 2) 104

by Jane Q. Public (#47957635) Attached to: Is Alibaba Comparable To a US Company?

Referring to state crony capitalism as "socialism" does not make it that.

I wasn't referring to crony capitalism, although I admit I could have worded it better. Mea culpa; it is reasonable to think that's what I meant from what I wrote. But it isn't actually what I meant.

To be clearer: EPA for example is "crony capitalism" by way of "market capture". Obamacare is a rather huge attempt at socialism.

The current setup in China is more accurately described as "Fascism-Lite".

I wouldn't quite say that either. It is totalitarianism wearing padded gloves. When China's leaders really got it through their heads that their economy was genuinely starting to fail, big time, they introduced "incentives": allowing businesses to be just a little bit capitalist. When that worked, they allowed a little more.

But make no mistake: the central leadership still rules things with an iron fist, and controls the economy. That's socialism (which, truth be told, isn't that different from fascism, after all). They just know which side of their bread the butter is on, and allow "capitalist" activity where it suits them.

Comment: Re:Oregon... (Score 1) 195

by Jane Q. Public (#47957609) Attached to: Wave Power Fails To Live Up To Promise
Such systems are being built today and I helped build one myself in a small way, when I was working for an engineering firm.

Pumped storage is an excellent way to store that energy, because infrastructure is relatively cheap, and losses are minimized. (Compare to trying to store the same energy with chemical batteries.) But you are mistaken about one thing. You don't build just one super-huge tank; you soon run into diminishing returns. Instead you build a lot of smaller tanks. That's more reliable anyway.

Comment: Re:COBOL: Why the hate? (Score 1) 270

by Jane Q. Public (#47957581) Attached to: College Students: Want To Earn More? Take a COBOL Class
I've done both.

VB6 was well-organized and coherent (but not entirely object-oriented).

But .NET, when it came around, was an attempt to do 2 things at the same time: [1] create a common underpinning (bytecode runtime) for all their IDE languages, and [2] insert object-orientation at the same time.

.NET was a mess. I liked VB6, as incomplete as it was, but .NET felt like a random conglomeration of just "stuff" thrown together to make it web-compatible. And I really hated that even when you created a pre-defined web object in .NET, you still had to manually define actions that should have been defaults for any such object. It is just plain weird.

In my personal opinion, having used both: VB6 was a great product for its time. .NET was made to be a successor to it, but never quite made the grade.

Comment: Re:The UK Cobol Climate Is Very Different (Score 1) 270

by Jane Q. Public (#47957531) Attached to: College Students: Want To Earn More? Take a COBOL Class

Yes and no. The whole work from home thing is becoming less common. Agile development is doing a good job killing it.

Utter nonsense. It was Agile Development that STARTED my work-at-home. Where did you get the idea that they are incompatible? In fact, it is Agile that made the whole thing possible.

Physician: One upon whom we set our hopes when ill and our dogs when well. -- Ambrose Bierce