The entire article's response to the question is based on the premise that the guy that is 'daylighting' on the job is an exceptional worker and gets all of his jobs done in a fraction of the time it takes his peers. The author gives an example of a programmer that does 50% more work than his peers, but doesn't get any bonuses, promotions, or pay increases when performance reviews come about. So, that employee starts putting out the same amount of work as his peers and then spends the rest of his time doing his own things. Most people are not that far above average. The entire argument is worthless outside of a few exceptions.

The answer to the question is simple. If he is not doing his job, he should not be working for the company. He is hired to develop software during business hours. That is his job. He is not hired to 'complete 4 tasks per day' as the article describes. This whole article seems like it is trying to shift the blame on to the employer, instead of forcing the employee to take responsibility for his actions.

And I think it is awful that people use stereotypes to express their own opinions as facts and insults.

Being a farmer doesn't necessarily make you vote for one party or another. I have met farmers that have opposing political views. You cannot claim all farmers think and act a certain way any more accurately than you can claim all people from large cities are gang-bangers and thugs.

Is the news so slow today that they must fall back to this waste of time? Or was this an attempt to show more advertisements on the website by trolling the readers with stupid claims to get them to go to the comments page?

You have over a thousand developers. They won't be working on the same types of projects. They will have different needs. You need to break it down by departments or project types and find out what those developers need. It sounds very ignorant to ask what the "best" of anything is when dealing with over a thousand people that do different things. I have worked for two different small-to-medium sized companies, developing in-house software that is only used by other employees and systems. My needs at each company were completely different. The only things that are really the same is that I still sit at a chair in front of a desktop with at least two monitors.

I started to feel old when I realized that no one under the age of thirty will have any clue what you are talking about.

It does have person/object tracking. I am not sure of it's reliability, but can select a "target" through the display on the controls and follow in 3 modes.
1) It can follow behind the person.
2) "Profile" mode allows it to move parallel to the person with the drone roughly 90 degrees to the right or left side.
3) 'Spotlight' mode (which I think is circling above a target).

The Mavic also has forward collision avoidance which will help when following behind a person.

The person that must maintain your code in the future may disagree with your claim when he or she discovers assembly is involved.

Ok, so we shouldn't force the AI to work at a help desk.

Of course Millennials are concerned about it. Modern school systems and society have basically indoctrinated Millennials in the belief of man-made climate change. Society often considers them to be fools or ignorant for even questioning the belief, instead of encouraging them to ask "why" and search for truths and data that supports or refutes climate change theories. Furthermore, Millennials have never been taught or seen the things that make some of the older people doubt the validity of claims related to global climate change.

The fact that Millennials believe in things related to climate change really has nothing to do with greater acceptance of scientific research. It is just a product of their upbringing.

When I was in my 20's and looking for my first programming job, something I heard several times is, "It came down to you and this other guy, but we chose the other guy because he had several more years of experience." That meant "the other guy" would have been in at least in his 30's, if not older. I think it really comes down to the type of company you work at and the type of work they need their programmers to do. If you are truly worried about a 20 year old replacing you, then either the quality of your work is poor or you need to work for a different company.

And Democrats reject Republican bills before they come out. This isn't anything new.

Have you noticed that, over the years, many Democratic and Republican candidates have said things like, "I will bridge the aisle to get things done." Guess what? It never works. People often believe that their own view on a topic is the only correct one and rarely put a significant amount of effort into understanding opposing views. Instead they watch news sources and read blogs that reinforce their own views. The belief that their own view is the only correct one makes people feel that any compromise related to the subject is the wrong thing to do in that situation. In other words, crossing the aisle to work with the opposing party is a nice campaign selling point when thought about it in an abstract manner, but the politician's constituents and financial backers rarely actually want that when presented with a real world scenario or bill. Furthermore, in these situations, compromise by a representative is often viewed as a sign of weakness by his/her supporters. Weak politicians that do not do what their financial backers and constituents want will not be reelected.

That is one of the best analogies I have heard regarding to this topic.

Even if the number of crimes did not change, did lack of lighting impact the ability to solve or identify and convict the crimes that did occur? Also, did they check if the various types of traffic changed?

If you have never heard of a programming language the company uses, there is a good chance it is not a good language to work with and you should probably stay away. If a business wants you to program in RPG for OS/400 systems, run away.

They are just hypothetical at right now... but if they do exist, they will have mass and travel faster than the speed of light. They do not violate the theory of relativity because they always travel faster than c.... they do not start at speeds less than c and accelerate to or beyond the speed of light.