Call it whatever you want. Apprentice/Master --- but there needs to be a way to differentiate - and thereby focus the work efforts. Master developers/designers need to be building a cohesive set of tools and a design that the Apprentice uses to get the job done.

An apprentice programmer should never be allowed to lead the design or implementation of a project - I don't care how many years they have with the company. Years of service does not equal quality of skill set. I've seen too many projects destroyed because the wrong people were in key positions in the team - and should not have been. The idea that every programmer is an interchangeable widget is a lie. If you are peddling that 'happy joy and rainbow land' view of the world - then you are part of the problem that I am talking about.

The truth is in the deliverables. Most of those deliverables are nowhere close to being right.

Allowing (or forcing) application programmers to do system programming. If your language forces the programmer to reinvent the wheel - he will invariably do it badly. The corollary to this: poor libraries/frameworks/abstractions built by aforementioned programmers then let bad programmers spread even more bad code.

This, by the way, is the source of all zero days.

If you have to do system programming - make sure you have a bona fide systems programmer - preferably who has a thorough understanding of secure programming - on the team; either as a reviewer, or designer.

Given that there aren't that many real system programmers out there - those that are should focus on building tools that keep application developers from shooting themselves in the foot (so they don't have to be there to keep the carnage from happening). In this instance, I am all for gun control. You don't give a child a loaded gun, and you shouldn't give an application programmer one either.

Huge efforts and money are spent protecting the edges of the network - whether it be firewalls and other router configurations, OS level configurations, and other filtering tools (such as virus detection and scanning, and log and packet inspection and analysis tools). There are also plenty of security companies willing to sell you a magical black box that will solve all of your security problems.

The opposite seems to be the case when it comes to spending time and money on the security of applications used by internal and external customers - either through retrofitting existing applications, or when building new applications. Companies don't want to spend money to retrofit sunk capital, and I don't see security firms talking about or creating tools and common standards for building new secure applications.

Given this dichotomy, do you think that is a correct characterization of the problem space, and do you think we are spending our time and money in the right places as a result?

Millennials are just starting in the workforce so they have much less to lose if they do get compromised. That also means that whatever setback occurs can be quickly recovered. While I can understand why they may not care now about exposure of their content and information today - that isn't to say that will be a constant throughout their lives.

Ask them the same question in 10 to 20 years and see what they say. If they have significant savings or other holdings that are compromised that took many years to acquire - or their credit gets trashed - you can bet they will change their answer. There may be edge cases - but the vast majority will have families, mortgages, and other issues that disruption through faulty security will be unacceptable.

Polls like this are of limited value unless you can look beyond the poll itself to what is really behind how people are responding. Don't fall for the hype. Be a critical thinker.

Yes - lets squabble about this little blue marble, when there are quadrillions of tons of rare earths to be found in the asteroid belt.

Let's get off our collective butts, slap ourselves out of our collective malaise, and get the space elevator/ private sector affordable space launch vehicles/ Mars mission technology working NOW - so we can solve these problems without further destroying the earth.

...is people!

Processors today are orders of magnitude faster and more capable than just a few years ago. There shouldn't be a question that our apps run faster on them.

The problem is we are loading them down with extraneous cruft. Remove the bloat and you remove the problem. Throwing hardware at it may solve some of the problem - but that is just a bandaid, and definitely won't allow you to lead the market if your competitor is producing leaner, faster code.

The 8 track was a continuous loop - you can see a great picture of the inner workings at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... It used a pinch roller system to drive the tape - it was pulled from the center of the spool, and fed back onto the outside of the spool. Of course that means you couldn't rewind the tape - only go forward - so if you wanted to hear the last track you just heard, you had to fast forward all the way around until you got back to the original track.

My dad's stereo system only played albums and 8 track tapes - so I bought a few 8 tracks (Jackson 5 Triumph was one; can't recall the others) to hear what it sounded like on something other than my boom box (which back then didn't have much bass). It sounded pretty nice.

The whole nail and hammer bit was a snarky crack about obsolete technology and its relative usefulness. Of course, if you want to take that to its logical conclusion - the rules require you to hammer the nail through the device without modification to secure it to the wall. Hanging it on the nail after hammering the nail into the wall is cheating. As a result, technologies that provide a void/hole at some point are more successful than technologies that don't.

I expect Apple to use their collective lips to kiss unmentionable parts of my anatomy.

There, now we are even (considering how I've been figuratively and financially bent over every time I've bought an Apple product). My Mac Mini from 2008 is still chugging along after 8 years...I expect nothing less from my other technology. Guess my next phone/watch purchase will not be an Apple product.

I got my vinyl album, a nail, and a hammer. I guess I'll just mount it on the wall here next to my CD, LaserDisk, Betamax, VHS, 8Track, and Compact Cassette tape.

I rate the most viable technologies by the level of damage the nail does to the technology in question. Right now the LaserDisk, CD, Compact Cassette, and vinyl record are leading, as the nail did a real number on the others.

If people would focus on their own life and actions, and treated everyone else with respect and tolerance rather than trying to insert their beliefs into someone else's life - maybe the rest of us who just want to be left to pursue happiness in our own way, wouldn't have to waste time calling BS every other day of the week.

No - the point of imprisonment is not losing rights - it is primarily a means to reform the person so they can function in society again when their time is up, and some would see the time doing that as a just punishment for their crime.

Otherwise, what you said made rational sense.

It both saddens and amuses me that the very judgement handed down by this court could be equally applied to ALL religions. Is something not real because you don't believe in it? Conversely, is something real just because you believe in it? NO to both questions.

If we as a society are going to put limits on religion in these kinds of contexts - then they need to be applied equally to all religions in that environment.

The reason the framers of the Constitution made separation of church and state a key component is clearly illustrated here. We can not allow government bodies to give preferential treatment based on identification with 'acceptable' religions, at the expense of any other way of life. The tyranny of religious bigotry is no less dangerous than any tyranny that threatens freedom to choose.

In my domain - no. However, there are plenty of coders better than me in other arenas. If you are better than everyone at everything - then you are really something special.

Information privacy or data protection laws prohibit the disclosure or misuse of information held on private individuals. These laws are based on Fair Information Practice, first developed in the United States in the 1970s by the Department for Health, Education and Welfare (HEW). The basic principles of data protection are:

For all data collected there should be a stated purpose.

Information collected by an individual cannot be disclosed to other organizations or individuals unless specifically authorized by law or by consent of the individual

Records kept on an individual should be accurate and up to date

There should be mechanisms for individuals to review data about them, to ensure accuracy. This may include periodic reporting

Data should be deleted when it is no longer needed for the stated purpose

Transmission of personal information to locations where "equivalent" personal data protection cannot be assured is prohibited

Some data is too sensitive to be collected, unless there are extreme circumstances (e.g., sexual orientation, religion)