Comment Re:Upwork.com? (Score 1) 119
At least Upwork.com has location verification.
At least Upwork.com has location verification.
Is Upwork.com not good?
If Vertex Inc was public, I would buy their stock.
Also, sounds like a business opportunity. Charge 8% higher, and give 8% to some escrow company who pays all the tax for you.
Also, why can't we get Virtual Reality involved. If kids put on glasses and 100% of their vision is placed in VR to learn History, Math, English, Geography, etc, we could teach in 5 minutes concepts that takes days.
Most kids could reach High School level knowledge before they are in High School. Let every kid go forward at their own pace. List everything they have to learn K-12. Make a top notch, engaging, Virtual Reality simulation for everything they have to learn. Follow each up with a quiz. Make these videos available to the world. We could educate the world.
With his funds, he could pay a team to decide what 5 to 10 minute VR educational sessions need to exist, create them, and put them online for free. He could start an online high school and everyone in the world could get a High School diploma with nothing more than internet access.
I hate that I can't edit typos on slashdot. Could thing I pay an editor for when it matters.
All of Microsoft and he can figure out the simplest and easiest way to fix education.
1. The worst form of teaching is lecture.
2. The #1 most used for of teaching is lecture.
What really happens: Teach drones on. Kids hear the first five minutes (if they last that long) and then daydream the rest of the time.
With all the power of Microsoft, he can't engage kids in learning that is actually engaging?
Remove lectures. Teachers should teach, they should organize and project plan existing content.
Letter Factory does a better job teaching my young preschool kids than school teachers do. Go LeapFrog. My kids know their letters because they weren't lectured their letters, they watched a fun (at least fun for the kids) video that teaches them their letters. There are two senses involved: Visual and Audio, plus there is a tune, and some humor, like those old E guys saying, "Ehhh."
Want to teach a kid Math, show them some videos that explains and shows:
1. Who uses this math.
2. How they use it.
3. Visuals of math concepts.
Want to teach them history. Instead of paying a million teachers to drone on about history boringly, pay Hollywood filmmakers to make an educational movie with blockbuster budget. Need to know about George Washington? Watch his movie. Need to know about Egypt, there is a movie for each Pharaoh. Such educational films must be created in an engaging way.
Another way to engage kids that is effective is with games. Why are we wasting time lecturing kids, the least effective form of learning, when they will spend hours playing a game that could teach them the same thing. Video games have one up on movies as they engage three sense, sight, sound, and touch. Touch is powerful. Doing usually is orders of magnitude more effective than only listening.
I think you underestimate the reputation of Microsoft to the eyes of the general public.
JavaScript itself sucks. So no matter how good a framework appears to be, it sucks because it's foundation sucks, which leads to someone trying to fix it.
Don't worry, it will be fixed.
By removing JavaScript in favor of a type-safe languages compiling to WebAssembly.
Can someone explain the problem?
I live in Utah. It looks like the temperature will go up 1 or 2 degrees by 2100. So my kids will be dead before this is a concern.
But that doesn't take into account the fact that we are already switching to solar and electric cars. One discovery could change all this. Heck, a large astral body could pass between us an the sun and shade us for two days, which would nearly freeze the world and then maybe global warming is a good thing.
So what is the problem? Are we going to die? No. Are we going to starve? No. Are we facing the end of the species? No. We are looking at a rise of 1 to 2 degrees by 2100.
The rising oceans isn't really a problem. It actually means that the seas will go inland further, the air will have more moisture, there will be more precipitation.
No to mention, the oceans rising a few feet over about 80 years is not nearly as dramatic as the ocean rising a few feet in one day. Will there be homes and business affected? Yes. But they will have time to move or be torn down, except in hurricane areas.
I dislike pollution. That is a problem. It causes asthma in kids. It causes could. Inversions actually hurt lungs, kill old people. So I am all for cleaner air.
But Global Warming beyond 1 or 2 degrees is only a possibility. Solar panel roofs and roads and electric cars and so many other changes will happen by 2100. What if we run out of warming CO2 and start cooling?
So I am not denying global warming. I asking, what is the problem?
Global Warming deniers are funny. Global Warming doomsdayer's are just as funny. Both seem to be fanatics.
I agree that global warming exists, but I deny that global warming is a problem now or that it will be much of a problem in the future.
I also deny that we have to take active part in global warming prevention. The market will take care of itself. We will get electric cars. Continued efficiencies in light bulbs. We will discover more energy sources. We will begin to desalinate the ocean at a very rapid rate. We haven't even really begun that. What if we start pumping water to Utah's Great Salt Lake from California, which makes sense, because water pumped to Utah flows back to California, so everyone benefits. We fill up the Great Salt Lake, which causes increased precipitation in the Rockie Mountains, rebuilds the snow packs, etc.
By 2100, if scorching of the earth looks likely I feel it will be solvable. What if we build a paper thin shield and deploy it to space and shade portions of the earth to prevent it from scorching? What would be the effect of shading 1 square mile of earth from the sun? What if that becomes an industries and we start shading thousands of square miles of earth from the sun? What if the cost to do that is nothing by 2100, as we have a new thriving community on Mars by then?
Or what if we put a large asteroid between the earth and the sun?
What if we start mining asteroids and bring air back to earth?
What if we just pump desalinzed water into the Sahara or Ghobi deserts and turn it back into a tropical forest and the increased plants absorb our extra C02?
Don't spend billions solving a problem that first, is not even for sure a problem, and second is likely to solve itself, and third we are likely to have way better technology to solve well before it actually becomes a problem.
Why don't we just stick cleaning up pollution. That is for sure a problem. That also would possibly result in hindering global warming.
Pollution is a problem, "Global Warming" or going up a degree or two or the next century is not.
2. Human rights. If a country has poor labor laws/basic rights/etc and doesn't treat people fairly, then it is fair game to tariff there.
Who decides what is a human rights violation? Remember, the US went through a sweat shop phase. What if another country needs a sweat shop phase to take the next step in their industrial evolution?
In the Dominican Republic, I met a man who just got a job making clothes for a popular name brand. He was so excited. He said: I *only* have to work 12 hours a day six days a week and I get 700 pesos a month. Some celebrity came out in the news crying about how unfairly this man was being treated. However, the celebrity forgot to mention that before taking these jobs that were supposed human rights violations this man was working 14 hours a day, 7 days a week and getting about twelve pesos a day. He was paid twice a day, about 6 pesos for working in the morning and about 6 pesos for working afternoon and evening. About 360 pesos if he worked all 30 days in a month. But they didn't talk monthly, because he would immediately spend the money on food as he lived paycheck to paycheck, every half-day. SO if there was no work a day or a half day, he and his family didn't eat lunch or dinner. They already never ate breakfast as they never had food.
So this so-called human rights violations, that allowed this man to double his income, have Sundays off and work two hours less a day, is something you would like to tariff or block?
First world solutions don't always solve third world problems. The world is not so simple as our first world problems make it appear to be.
We should do our own Unit Tests.
Someone else should monitor code coverage, cylcomatic complexity, etc., and push us for more and better tests.
Someone else should do QA.
Someone else should write system integration tests (where you test the installed system, not an isolated piece of code)
All this sounds bad, but you know what, once the production issues are sorted, we will finally have a mass production of cars that don't use gas. Of course, regular car companies are scrambling to keep up. They want to be fast enough that they are ready if Tesla fails, to purchase the failed factories on auction, hire the same workers at 75 cents on the dollar, and not have have the burden of cost to train them, and add their expertise from gas car manufacturing, and turn a profit.
Remember, many companies that bear the cost of innovation, die by that cost. And then success rises from the ashes.
"Openly pro-union workers were among those fired this week. Some believe they were targeted. . . "
Were they targeted or did their "Union attitude" also result in poor performance?
Never been part of a union, but have worked with a few union workers before. My limited anecdotal personal experience is that union workers are slow. Have an attitude where you should never sweat on work time and never poop on your own time. They do about 1/4th the work as non-union laborers.
I believe unions were critical to move the US forward during the early to mid 1900s. However, are unions still solving major problems? Or have the problems unions were needed for been mostly solved and now are unions mostly just creating new problems?
Show me a union that inspires workers to excel instead of inspiring them to slack off and hide behind the union to avoid being fired for poor performance and then I might consider unions useful again.
No. Just a lot of entry level courses in college have changed to it. Entry level courses result in the most searches per user.
Since all the tools that check for the most popular language are heavily influenced by browser searches, it is skewed quite a bit. It is probably between twice as much and ten times as much, but the data of internet searches is so generic it is impossible to ever know for sure.
I have never seen it used by any production company near me and rarely see job posting for it that are for development. I have only seen it mentioned in build/test positions and even then rarely.
Speaking of complete idiocy . . . my typing and grammar sucked in that last post. Yes, yes, I did post without proofreading.
Always leave room to add an explanation if it doesn't work out.