.. in short, your back-end code is a walk in the park.

Ok, so you'll have the new Amazon logistics system which tells them what to stock on which shelf in which DC coded up by next Tuesday? Cool.

So, they're selecting for the best liars? The problem with any measurement of human beings is that they will absolutely try to game the system. Unless a company can keep the hiring criteria secret, they'll never actually get what they're looking for.

"The planet will be fine. WE'RE fucked."

How unusual...a person views the world through a filter based on their personality and preferences and doesn't realize their own biases and that other people might think/work differently...

In other news, for some incomprehensible reason, most non-technical people don't like the CLI. I don't understand why they would hamper themselves by using a lesser interface.

The me be clear...middle managers like you are the problem, not competent developers.

The best possible way to launch a product is with a team of six or less high power developers with one manager: a C-level executive who will listen openly and honestly, make the tough decisions quickly, and keep everybody else the fuck out of the way.

Are you going to start adding "in somebody else's airplane" when you say "fly"? Are you going to say "place my life in someone else's hands" instead of "going to the doctor" (or "drive to work" for that matter)?

I've seen this meme about lack of control over your data "in the cloud" on Slashdot for a while, and frankly, it's ridiculous. Every day, you place your financial future, your health, and your life in the hands of complete strangers. Sometimes that trust is justified and sometimes it is not, but what you're advocating is the same as refusing to eat at restaurants, use public transportation, put your money in banks, or do just about anything else in modern civilization that requires that someone else do something for you.

The scientist they interviewed just sounds like he has a lack of experience with lawyers. He complains that the letter was "vague and threatening". Obviously, he's never dealt with lawyers before, because sending vague, threatening letters is *what they do for a living*.

Sorry, but your basic premise is wrong. There does NOT need to be a way to "take sites like this down", if in fact you could accomplish that in any meaningful way. It's the same basic flaw in any argument for censorship - the idea that if you remove people's access to something you think is undesirable, that it solves the problem. Really, the problem is your own: that you think that the thing you want to censor is undesirable/wrong.

Yes, but the Declaration of Independence said that "We the People" *always* have the right to do away with government that no longer represents our interests (by force if necessary). Of course, whether the American people still have the testicular fortitude to do what is necessary is very much up for debate...

I think the idea of "productivity" is a hold-over of the Industrial Revolution that does not pertain to many of today's jobs; jobs where the unit of work is hard to define, and ultimately irrelevant. Are you telling me you pick your doctor by how many patients he can see in a day? Probably quite the opposite!

In terms of software development, I find that the *effectiveness* of a developer is more important, where effectiveness considers the following (not an exhaustive list):
      - Appropriateness of solution
      - Thoroughness of implementation (logging, exception handling, graceful failure, input validation, etc.)
      - Well-written, parsimonious code that is easy to read and descriptive of what it does
      - Works right the first time, no kickbacks from QA or end user

Give me someone who is effective but slow over someone who craps out junk quickly any day of the week and twice on Sunday! In the end, I don't care about productivity metrics, I care that the end users get a useful piece of software that does what they need with a minimum of headaches.

Not really surprised; after all, this is the same US House of Representatives majority that believes the reason we don't have more jobs is that businesses aren't allowed to poison us as much as they'd like.

It's not hard, it just doesn't make any sense.

Compare two men in their late 20's that each earn $60,000/yr. One is single and lives in Texas. The other is married with 2 kids an lives in the Bronx. Do you think that they really should pay the same amount of tax?

Or compare a retired millionaire to an elementary school teacher living in the same town. They both have an income of $30,000/yr. Should they pay the same amount in tax?

Unless your goal is to punish people for living in the "wrong" place or having the "wrong" career, or not having the foresight to already be millionaires with no debt before you institute your tax policy...

Oh, it's not hard... it just doesn't make any sense.

Compare two men making $60,000/yr, both in their late 20's: one is single and lives in Texas, and the other is married with 2 kids and lives in the Bronx. It doesn't matter what percent you pick (unless it's zero), it's going to hurt one of those guys more than the other.

Or consider a retired millionaire who has no debt. He can comfortably live on very little income. Are you telling me that he should pay the same amount in tax (or less) as a teacher or firefighter?

Unless your goal is to punish people for living in the "wrong" place or pursuing the "wrong" career...

Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.
    ~Edsger W. Dijkstra