shruubi

The funny thing is, organizations that are actually trying to make the world a better place by helping the homeless, poor, disadvantaged etc I've never even heard of.

The way I see it is that VC's are all about world changing and making the world a better place, so long as in this better world they can still milk a market for every last penny.

Here's the thing, it's all well and good for an adult to tell a kid "oh just ignore it", but you can't ignore someone sneaking up behind you and slamming your face into a brick wall, so of course, adrenaline coursing through you, you retaliate. Now, despite you being attacked out of the blue, for no reason other than some sadistic asshole gets his jollies out of hurting you, and you trying to defend yourself, when teachers dole out the punishment you also get punished.

A system that punishes a kid that was assaulted from behind because they tried to defend themselves from their attacker is not a system that is designed to prevent bullying or help the bullied. The reason every kid in every school thinks all those anti-bullying programs are stupid and don't want to participate is because they realize something that the teachers don't, which is that it is nothing but bullshit lip-service to make those whose responsibility it is to actually do something feel better about their absolute lack of care or effort.

1) I personally don't like Douglas Crockford at all, I find him all together arrogant and overly concerned with presenting himself as an infallible single source of truth. I respect the work the man has done, but I personally think the conference is better off without him.

2) It seems that the conference organisers are all too concerned with coming out and proudly parading there actions without bothering to see if Crockford would be amenable to other courses of action like an apology or retraction of those comments.

To me, these kind of incidents feel more like the conference using the drama to boost their attendance numbers than acting in any kind of best interest of the attendee's. That's not to say that there haven't been serious incidents that need to be dealt with at conferences, but, an outright banning without any kind of negotiation where the speaker is offered to retract/apologise for their comments where the banning is done on a public forum seems designed more towards gaining attention rather than justice.

You're argument is predicated on the idea that because the "new guard" don't need to rely on IRC and email anymore that the "old guard" who have been doing this since the only way to contribute to projects WAS IRC and email need to change their ways to accommodate others.

That isn't a bad thing at all, in fact most people (myself included) think it would be a good idea, but you have to remember that the FSF isn't just a software organization, but it is also more or less a political organization as well, and their processes will reflect the values of those whose interests align. While Emacs indeed does have new leadership under John Wiegley, as a whole, the project cannot change without the blessing of the GNU elders.

I feel your point might loose a bit of steam when your main argument for moving towards a pull-request model is based on "this is how they do it on Github", given that as you acknowledged, it is a non-free project that the FSF looks unfavorably on.

It's surprising that it seems like only Isis really stood up to his line of questioning while the rest kind of fell silent.

To be fair, I've never been much of a fan of the whole NoSQL solution, so I may be biased, but what real benefits do you gain from using NoSQL over anything else?

I always thought the idea of being happy about doing a job was a little weird, and maybe it's just me, but given that almost every job puts you in a service position, I find it weird that people expect you to be happy to act as a service-monkey to someone's whim all in the goal of making someone else lots of money.

Each activity would have an associated fragment, the idea was that the activity would be responsible for loading the fragment as the current view and other lifecycle functions as well as being the entry-point for any external data-loading (through creating and calling of services).

The fragment would initiate with a reference to the parent activity as a context, and would be responsible for view-centric things like displaying content and adding event handlers, which would more often than not use the context reference to call some remote API.

I suppose you could think of it in terms of Model/Controller/View-Controller but I'm sure there is a more correct model for thinking about it (and it probably is more straight MVC anyways).

The problem I've found with Android is that Google has created almost it's own language when it comes to Android app architecture, which creates a lot of confusion, especially for developers who just assume that all frameworks use the MVC concept (laugh if you will, but this is a thing).

Even though google is quite behind when it comes to the app market, I think there is still time for them to come out with a new set of documentation which outlines the "correct" (the "Google-blessed" one at least) structure for Android apps so that we as a development community can start moving away from the "everything-and-the-kitchen-sink goes in the current activity" style of Android development.

TL;DR - Australia suffers from the sin of not being America when it comes to media content-access, where providers seemingly don't care about our money and the only way to get access is through an overpriced service run by a monopoly.

It was definitely heartbreaking as I had fully intended on going and had been looking forward to it for a long time.

And yes, there are lecturers who don't mind answering questions, but there are very few students who have never met the grumpy, tenured "I don't give a fuck, I lost faith/hope a long time ago" professor who will go out of their way to make sure they aren't bothered with questions while they talk.

Ask a question in a lecture? The 100+ other people in the room are now staring at you like you're an idiot, despite the fact that most probably have the same question.

Ask for clarification on something the lecturer said? You've interrupted their flow now, and want you to sit down, shut up and ask after class.

Go to ask after class? 12 other people have questions they were too afraid to ask during class or couldn't and the lecturer doesn't have time to attend to all of you, and tells you to send them an email they won't read.

Ask a TA? Most of them are overworked and underappreciated which leads to them having a very low tolerance for "I don't understand" questions, which can lead to a brush-off answer like "just re-read the lecture material."

Ask other students? They either don't know themselves or cannot explain it in an appropriate or correct manner, or simply cannot be bothered to help you because "this is too easy, why don't you get it!?"

Now of course, not every lecturer/TA is like this, and I had some wonderfully helpful and open teachers while I was in university, however, both myself and other people I know from across many different schools have had numerous experiences like this.

And here's the other thing, as a student I've been guilty of doing the exact things I describe above, either out of arrogance or simply down to the fact that I was slammed with other classes I just didn't have the time or patience to help others. Is it something I am proud of? Of course not, looking back now I can safely say I was a dick.

It gets even worse for women, when you differ from the majority of others in your class simply by genetics, it creates a feeling of not wanting to stand out or give other people a reason on top of their sub-conscious bias to think you "don't belong here" or "aren't as good as the rest of us."

Somehow, this just makes it better...

That being said, I'm not trying to take anything away from log-based debugging, there have been many times when log-based debugging has saved my bacon, but it feels strange that there is almost an attitude of interactive debuggers being "lesser" in these comments.

Why are we as an industry suddenly so married to the idea that rather than evaluating other solutions we should just hammer away at React until it works for what we need?

1 - This decisions seems based more on the fact that Rails isn't as trendy as it used to be

2 - Some of these benchmarks for performance are pitting interpreted languages against compiled languages which will explain some of the performance difference

3 - Saying that Rails is static makes me think that the author would prefer a NodeJS like situation where every release might contain backwards-incompatible changes

4 - You don't future proof your application by trying to predict what will be popular in the future, you future proof by investing in stable technology and ensuring you have the talent pool to maintain it

It's easy for management to say how peachy things are when they are the people who very well might be (unknowingly) creating this culture.

The most amazing part about all of this is that not a single person who has come out saying this is false has said they will either look into it themselves or put their money where their mouths are and do something about it. It's easy to be the general when the guns aren't pointed at you.

Lost it right here.