lleger

Well, for one, we're Parishes in Louisiana, not Counties, but that's mostly a pedantic thing.

There's another site that I've seen that does something similar: http://www.prodigyhealthinsurance.com/

19/20. I've done this before because Dr Eckman's work interests me. I always misinterpret Asian smiles, for some reason.

Thanks for all the responses guys. We've decided to drop the free plan in light of the prescient advice herein.

Louisiana has free in-state tuition, so I'm graduating with an engineering degree debt free. Sure, my institution isn't as highly rated as the others I got into, but they just weren't worth the premium — especially for a degree like engineering which is essentially standard across universities. (Graduating from a top 10 school could easily set you back $200k.) Which is great, because instead of working to pay off the debt in school or worrying about taking a job right out of school, I can take my time and crank away on my startup. Win-win.

I don't like these kinds of questions because more often than not people get it wrong. People who aren't actually performing any of these actions often mislabel and completely misunderstand the distinction, but also we often don't understand it either. It's not very difficult, but I feel being precise is important because it classifies exactly what your skills are and what can be expected of you.

First, a programmer is simply, as the word implies, someone who programs. A programmer can be a polyglot or monoglot — either way, a programmer programs.

A developer is someone who develops. Developers write code, but they do so on a more macro level than programmers. Developers tend to work on whole projects, so they'll start from scratch and finish the project out. This term is pretty commonly applied to people who built websites or web apps.

So the key difference between a programmer and a developer is the scope and length of their work. A developer can be working on many projects at once and only for a short time; a programmer likely works on only a few projects for a very long time.

An engineer, however, is completely different. An engineer is a trained professional with a college degree. Engineering is the long respected art of developing solutions for problems using mechanical devices. Engineering might employ the use of programming, but programmers and developers are not engineers.

I've held each title. Programmer and developer can sometimes be interchanged, but engineer can't. I personally identify myself as an engineer — after a grueling four year degree — and it really gets to me when engineer is just handed out as a title. You're not looking for a 'web engineer,' you're looking for a web programmer. Not only is it disingenuous, it's also harmful to a profession that has been around for centuries. I wish there were more consistency in which titles are applied.

The title of this article is absolutely irrelevant to the actual arguments presented therein. He never argues that a high IQ will kill your startup. He only argues that not working and avoiding problems could lead to the destruction of your startup. Which, of course, is patently obvious, even to someone who isn't intelligent at all.

A high IQ won't ever kill your startup; being a highly intelligent person can only help you. Don't be so sensational with your titles.

His fundamental argument is logically flawed on a very basic level. It's simply insane to think that an ecosystem that has been operating in a certain manner for its entire existence will suddenly change directions and begin operating in a massively different manner. It's not going to happen. Betting on a platform that may in the future become awesome instead of voting on a phone that you admittedly think might be the best phone on the market is as crazy as betting on a horse that looks like it has the potential to win instead of the horse that is winning. It just doesn't make any sense.

There are many legitimate reasons to switch from iPhone to Android. He hasn't convinced me this is one of them.

Sounds like you're as much a Steve Jobs (or maybe just Apple) hater as this guy is a Steve Jobs lover. Maybe the article is a tad ridiculous, but at least some of the quotes are really good.

Dropbox Github

One I went to high school with, another I found at TechStars for a Day, another was a designer I worked with on another and the final one I knew through a blogging network from when I was like 12 and we recently connected in the past few years.

A doctored image about any aspect is still a doctored image — the same principles apply.

But still: it doesn't matter. Consumers aren't buying products based upon a photo. With the iPad, they've either already decided they want one or went into the store and saw it for themselves and then decided. This one picture really doesn't matter.

Why is Apple the only company being called out? If anyone — besides Apple-haters — really cared about this, image doctoring wouldn't be such a pervasive technique used in all forms of marketing. Other companies would be the focus, too — Apple isn't alone here.

This has nothing to do with image doctoring and everything to do with Apple.

For the life of me I can't figure out why this is a big deal. Every marketing department uses doctored images in their promotions. It's a fact of consumerism. But it doesn't matter — really. That single image, no matter how embellished, didn't sell any iPads. The iPad sold itself.

I'm going to give you an unpopular answer, but as an engineer I have enough credence to say this:

You cannot become an engineer or learn engineering without going to college to become one.

You have to understand: engineering is far different from computer science. Even computer engineering — which is my field. It's a field that you can't practice in without a degree. It's not like computer science where you can get a job programming without a degree. No engineering firm will even consider you without a degree.

And that's because engineering requires formal training from certified teachers according to a standardized curriculum. The skills, thought processes, problem solving strategies and specific knowledge of the individual engineering fields is highly tailored. And, most importantly, extremely arduous. If an engineer has ever scoffed at your degree in college, it's because compared to his workload — no matter your degree — you have an easy time. (Because of this, we're also all arrogant :)

But, to answer your question: the best place to learn the principles of engineering is in an engineering class. In fact, it's the only place. Even if you read online articles or textbooks, you won't ever get the full engineering perspective. Only professors, uniquely qualified to endow the sacred profession, can teach the principles.

If you're currently studying CS at school, I highly recommend sitting in an introduction to engineering class. Speaking from experience, engineering has helped me immensely in computer science. I'm a much better programmer from the problem solving skills I learned in my engineering classes.

I hope this helps. Engineering is such a wonderful major, and I love every minute of it. Good luck!

This article is indicative of a culture that has become far too focused on being "politically correct" and less focused on everything else. Seriously? This is ridiculous. "Founding fathers" is neither elitist nor sexist. It's a phrase that doesn't evoke any sex at all — it simply means a person who helped start something. Please, just grow up.

I think the important thing is that Apple doesn't include features for the purpose of having them. It's frivolous to have a feature that doesn't work properly or can't effectively be leveraged by developers. Apple patiently fleshes out everything before it's publicly released. So while Android's OS might technically be more advanced than iOS, in practicality and implementation iOS is the best mobile platform. For example, look at the front facing camera. iPhone 4 wasn't the first to have a front facing camera, but it was the first to have one that simply works — and that's what consumers want.

So, to answer your question, no: iOS hasn't irrevocably fallen behind. Has it fallen behind, technically? Yeah, probably. Irrevocably so? No.

This is awesomely good advice all around.

By engineer, they mean programmer or developer, of course.

OK: democracy was the wrong word to use here. However, the point still remains and you've quite nailed it — there needs to be clarity between Apple and the developers of their platform.

True — however that doesn't stop the DOJ from initiating an investigation or other third parties from requesting one. I think that Apple wants to avoid that kind of investigation. In any case: there are problems with the App Store, and I think that's the issue at hand here.

The point wasn't that those apps _don't_ have this functionality builtin, but rather that it's not an available API to developers. Marco had to implement a workaround in order to offer the brightness slider in Instapaper. It works, but it's not native functionality.

But those were just examples of a macro issue, so I really wouldn't focus on that too much.

Thanks for the compliment. You're probably right about the DOJ, but I like to stay optimistic when it comes to our system of justice.

The point is that the API Apple used to implement it isn't available to developers. GoodReader likely implemented a workaround, such as the one Instapaper has. It's not a native element, however.

I agree with every single point in this comment. pclark: you read my mind.

Of all the languages I've mastered over the years, by far my favorite one was Ruby. It's a different experience than other languages such as C, PHP, or Java. Also: python and, to some extent, perl. Some of the emerging languages, such as scala and erlang and haskel, are fun as well, but if you're looking for an easy and fun web language I'd definitely try out Ruby. And then, after you know Ruby, take a look at the popular frameworks: Ruby on Rails and Sinatra. They really make web development fun. Good luck!

Foursquare – definitely not, but then again I don't use it. Maybe someone who actually plays the game would.

Twitter — possibly. It depends if twitter had the same pervasiveness as it does today. In reality, that's probably impossible: twitter's ubiquity is due in large part to the lower barrier of entrance. So it seems that paying for it reduces the utility of the product and, therefore, makes it not worth the money.

In summary: no.

If entrepreneurs never pursued their dream just because someone else had already done it, we wouldn't have some of the most important innovations. Some of the greatest companies grew not out of a need for something that didn't exist, but out of a need to do it better. If you have an idea and can execute it better, or in a new, needed way, then you should absolutely do it. Pursue it with everything you have. You're an entrepreneur, after all.

It's more like:

Q: Which Denny's should I go to: the one on Main St or another one?

A: You should go to the IHOP on First St. It's the best all-day breakfast restaurant in town.

To quote the poster: "Or, should I consider another device from Verizon, etc. instead?"

Suggesting the iPhone is perfectly fine because, as far as I'm aware, it falls under "another device."

I fail to see how it's off topic ("Or, should I consider another device from Verizon, etc. instead?") or inflammatory (iPhone is a very good device).

A. "Or, should I consider another device from Verizon, etc. instead?"

B. An opinion was asked and an opinion was given. I didn't proffer anything beyond what was requested.

C. And you and the people who downvoted me come off as Android fanboys.