Perhaps learning calculus is about learning to think in abstract and increasingly difficult (although mathematically provable and correct) realms of intangible worlds.
And software engineering is nothing, if not that.
Take a look at ZTree.
Like TC but totally keyboard driven. I can't live without it.
Turn off the WiFi adapter before putting your droid on standby.
Turn it back on when you wake it back up.
Your standby battery life will go from one day to over a week.
See also, survivor bias.
You'll get a few hits on this one, no doubt. Well, one for sure.
Any chance I could ping you directly with a few questions?
One word for you : Craigslist.
Assuming you're in a locale with decent CL usage, there's no better techno-recycle center.
Honestly I think you have it backwards.
Old school engineers doing it by hand had to know what they were doing.
Noobs with enough experience to 'look good' can have their deficiencies glossed over by the powerful CAD/CAM software, letting them build inconsequential assemblies that individually would work nicely in isolation, but fail as a whole because they didn't understand (or consider) the engineering and physics at the higher level.
Consider the difference between software engineering and programming. An average coder that knows his way around Eclipse can write a hand full of nice classes, but real software engineering by the heavy hitters can happen in a room without a computer - that's where you see the big picture.
At some point pro-advertising people have to argue for the proposition that advertisers have an inalienable right to try to bother people with their commercial messages, and I'm willing to engage that point because I think it is wrong. I don't think they have that right -- quite the opposite in fact.
I don't think advertisers have an inalienable right to anything -- if this battle turns legal, it won't be advertisers suing end users or adblock developers.
But would advertisers sue publishers or content owners if the size and nature of the audience was fundamentally misrepresented? Oh, yeah -- that already happens in the offline media world.
That threat, if it becomes more commonplace, puts pressure on publishers to make sure those ads get seen. And that's where the trouble for end users could occur.
(It's also one reason Google's pay-per-click ad revolution shook things up so much: As an advertiser, you don't care if the ad was seen 10 times or 10 million times as long as you're getting the clickthrough rate you want and ONLY paying for that clickthrough rate. As someone else in the thread said: People who use Adblock don't click on ads, so the pay-per-click model actually helps perpetuate the current state of things by taking pressure off of publishers to deliver raw impression numbers.)
Slashdot's anti-ad rhetoric aside, content creators or rights holders have a right to monetize if they want to -- just as content consumers have a right to bypass that content. Everyone has a choice and everyone has other options.
Right now, the easiest path for those who want to skip ads is also the best-of-both-worlds path: You can consume the content you want *and* avoid the ads. Eventually, some (maybe a few, maybe many) content creators will simply not serve content unless they have confirmation that their monetization vehicle was served as well. Some sites will die because it turns out there are other options -- and many will thrive because people need what they've got.
If it *does* become a legal battleground, it'll be less about the macro and more about the micro. No one gives a fuck if there's one less or one more eyeball on some half-baked 9gag clone serving up commoditized CPM advertising. But a social-media ad that's relevant to maybe 100 people in the whole country? Advertisers -- and their attorneys -- damned well care if they're losing significant percentages on those hyper-targeted buys, which often carry a premium.
but how often do you need to accelerate from a dead standstill to 60mph, as quickly as possible?
Eight or more times a day, each time I get onto the freeway in the middle of fast traffic. Merging into 70mph traffic when your can can only get to 42mph on the onramp and the odds of getting slammed from behind go up exponentially. Personally I like to be going about 10mph faster than the rest of traffic while I'm merging in, so I can ease off it a little to fit into the most appropriate gap in cars (at 70mph, most cars decelerate down to 55 or 60 a LOT faster than they can accelerate up to 80 or 85.)
The finest eloquence is that which gets things done.