I think Hollywood is way to resistant to change. People (consumers) are quick to pick up new technologies to fit their needs. Big corporations can either comply and cater to those needs or force their own model on their customers.
The latter is NEVER the correct decision. Companies exist solely to please customers (which in turn amasses profit and satisfies investors).
The authors had previous knowledge of chef. But the aim is not exactly the same. I have used the three, and the fact that pallet is essentially a library helps factor your infrastructure in your application, and thus goes beyond the ability that chef and puppet provides. This become evident when having to express inter-dependencies between spread out pieces of your infrastructure.
Currently this comes with the price of a steeper learning curve, but the benefit is well worth it, as far as I'm concerned.
In my opinion it is an interesting article if for nothing else other than the fact that it puts you to thinking of the various possibilities.
I myself code lot in C and I heavily utilize printf and don't believe that everything can possibly be taken into consideration in a real world non-academic situation. It's good to use the updated functions as the author says but not using low level string manipulation might not always be the case if you are coding in C.
Scientist includes "computer scientist". At a certain level of competency "programmer" is comparable to "electrical engineer", and while "electrical engineer" does not defined which project you are working on at the moment, it does not need to, and neither does programmer when you are talking about "engineer class" programmers (lot of people are "engineer class" programmers without an engineering degree, but because they learned by themselves; this is fine).
The problem with "programmer" is not the field. It is the level of competency. Only entry/medium level programmers with few theoretical knowledge or only few to medium work experience are unable to work in every areas. That's why you need to precise for them what they are able to do, and implicitly that they are not able to do other things, or that learning how to do those other things would take lot of time. "Engineer class" programmers are generalist programmers, and that is comparable with electrical and other kind of engineers.
Reading in word-groups has always been the key to reading faster. BUT, you have to concentrate on MEANINGFUL GROUPS. The secret is learning to see the ideas VISUALLY. If you concentrate on visualizing the ideas in meaningful groups of words at a time, the reading becomes more meaningful, more like WATCHING a movie than LISTENING to a story. And verbalization will fade away on its own.
I could describe this better, but I'm typing this on my little Kindle screen.
But just search on "Reading Thought-Units" at Amazon for some really great new info on this subject.
On the other hand, I am a generalist programmer with an engineering degree that right at the moment is working on different project in various fields and in each of this project on various layers of technology => the result is that i'm touching at the same time electronic (yeah this even goes beyond programming), low level (drivers, telecom stack), medium level (application infrastructure), databases, user interface, sysadmin, and so over.
Saying that "programmer" means nothing is not completely false, but not completely true either. The application domain matters, but just as in other professions; you can't pretend that "electronic engineer" means nothing, you can't prented that "neutronic engineer" means nothing, even if you don't know if the first one is currently designing electronic boards for missiles or set-top-box, and if the second one is currently designing nuclear weapons or civilian reactor, or doing some radioprotection work.
In that sense saying "programmer" means nothing because there are lot of different programmers with various background and levels is an implicit depreciation of professional highly competent programmers capable of working on anything related to computer programming (and even in a lot of cases, beyond computer programming).
Having learned mathematics at school does not makes me a mathematician, even when I am using that math knowledge in a project, and not more than commentating about a book with friend makes me a literary critic. Doing dilettante or a little of entry level programming does not makes somebody a "programmer" either.
This sample is definitely worth clicking through to see the mechanics of the proposal.
I think the intersection of pricing and proposals is pretty compelling. A lot of the background advice is interesting, but so hard to convey through reading.
But being able to craft proposals, and then have a system help manage the workflow around their progress sounds worth a try. I wonder how it would integrate with businesses where they may be using multiple vendors and have competing proposals.
This is likely extremely naive: But would requiring a patent-filer to demonstrate a working implementation help mitigate this sort of thing? From what I can tell, Honeywell at least had the foresight to know where the tech was heading, but seemingly exerted no actual effort in getting there. Maybe I'm wrong about that - but this pattern seems to be true for patent trolls, at least.
If that's the case, they're basically building an artificial moat. So what now? Does Honeywell sue Nest out of existence? Require Nest license their patent? What are some likely goals and motives? What happens now?
There's a big difference between saying we WANT to go the moon, versus we WENT to the moon, or even we CAN go to the moon.
Gnome 3 makes me feel like a smartphone interface is being shoved down my throat even though I'm using a laptop. It's tolerable when I have a browser and little else opened, but it becomes hell to deal with when I have a browser, Netbeans, IM, a few folders, Word, terminal, etc. opened.
I haven't tried Windows 8 personally, so I can't really comment on that.
If a hiring company were look at this they'll naturally see the "I currently make" amount and consider that market rate. After all, it matters not what people want to make, but instead by the amount for which people have demonstrated that they are willing to work.
I tested a very similar device for the company I used to work at, the UI looked identical at least. There was very little relationship between my actual mental state, and the state of the display. The device I used had an API, so I wrote my own visualizer to make sure they weren't just blurring out the data -- long story short, I was never impressed with it. Blinking or moving your head triggered a larger reaction than any thought impulse.
Maybe the tech has gotten better, but I wouldn't hold your breath for anything that costs $100.
Well ... The real motive for this is to some way cut out sites like wiki leaks from revealing the names of corrupt Indian politicians who have siphoned of tax payer's money to their Swiss banks accounts.
This project seems alright enough for a mini hackathon. I would be interested in building such a site, however I lack some knowledge in a few things that are needed.
Subscribing to Hacker News I have figured out it being simply parsing the RSS feed to generate links. How do I go about doing it for the other types of feeds? Does Twitter and Google+ feeds require integration with their individual APIs? Any help is greatly appreciated!
Thanks! I hate OSX mouse. If it's not for the good trackpads on MacBooks and the new trackpad, I could have gone back completely to Windows.
Bought Logitech/Microsoft/Cheap store brands, none of them gives a smooth mouse movement on OSX. It feels like someone's holding ur hand while using the mouse.
I've long disliked the acceleration ‘feel’ of Mac OS X, and have worked around it with acceleration-curve adjustments etc., but I find the explanation provided highly doubtful. Why? Well, for one: various games circumvent OS X’s own mouse speed/acceleration settings, and when they do so instantly reproduce the ‘feel’ from Windows. The same is true when emulating Windows through virtualisation software. If this was a hardware lag issue, then surely both of these would be affected too? And even were it a hardware issue, it shows that you can remedy it in software.
I'd long believed that the problem would never be addressed, and then a couple of months ago I used a new Apple Magic Mouse with Lion; the acceleration and speed was so good out of the box that I didn't install USB Overdrive as part of my new Mac setup routine for the first time in over 5 years. Could it be that it's a driver issue, or just different devices have different acceleration characteristics? Perhaps, but whatever the case might be, I'm far less inclined to attribute it to input lag.
