The Book "IQ and the Wealth of Nations" I think says it best... Wealth and IQ is highly correlated. Meaning, if you are wealthy, you are much more likely not to pirate software.

Research can say anything you want. For example... Lets say that those high "IQ" nations also most likely have the highest income levels. Meaning, another way to say this "research" shows that poorer nations pirate more software, which seems reasonable when you consider that these same people probably can't afford the software licenses and/or do not have companies that they work for that can actually buy the software. "Hackers" don't typically hack software because they are bad or low IQ people. They do it because most of the time they can't afford it otherwise.

Bosch Egrs wrote and tested the software and not VW. Someone at VW requested the change and paid Bosch to do it. Also, Bosch later sent a letter to VW telling them it would be illegal if they deployed this software. So apparently just a couple software engineers at VW not only write software but also come up with "innovative" ideas on companies largest project, manage their largest vendor, perform project management meetings with that vendor, and receive/answer the physical mail. No wonder they they made "mistakes". Other than attending board meetings, those couple of engineers basically run the entire VW company!!

Anytime I read articles like this, I just assume someone is trying to see something...

The best way to limit an attack like this is to limit how fast the attempts can be made. Rerun his "test" when the server only allows one password submit ever 10 seconds and see how long it takes. More secure you say?? Well, after 5 bad attempts, lock the account for 30 minutes?? Please, however, never lock the account entirely like SOME companies do. That makes a script kiddies actions my problem...

Good passwords can never stop common sense computing procedures...

Yes, I agree humans do have a number of significant design flaws... :)

Nothing can prevent the actions of simple ignorance... The call them pilots for a reason.

I am a pilot, and it is pretty obvious that the issue was that both of the young pilots just got behind the airplane. Just for the record, there is never a condition that a Stall horn should be ignored... These systems are always independent for good reason. The trainer aircrafts use a completely mechanical horn, and students must demonstrate several stalls to an FAA examiner (power on / power off) to obtain even a basic license. Meaning, there is no excuse for an airplane to stall other than pilot error.

Also, just because a pilot tube is stopped up, this is not a justification for not being able to manage the airplane. A simple cross scan with the other systems (Vacuum, Electrical, and especially GPS) would have told them that that static system was blocked. Icing is a very common occurrence to anyone who has a fair amount of IFR experience. Meaning, their pitot heater on should have been on the moment they knew precipitation was in the area. Even more, on any airplane once the leading edge accumulates significant ice, the airplane starts to feel an entirely airplane. Some airplanes even start to give a weird "howling" like noise that any experienced pilot can easily detect.

In short, the true reason for the crash is the classic pilot ostrich maneuver. Both of the young pilots decided to put their head in the sand hoping the problem would resolve itself rather than actually managing the airplane. The captain clearly understood this once he became involved, and was several minutes too late...

Probably because I have been having issues with service lately and I was really annoyed that their network just dropped a very important customers call?? There is little doubt in my mind that AT&T is one seriously messed up company (and network).

It was not my intent of putting a free market vs. socialism. Both have their key advantages as well as key disadvatages. The socialism disadvantages are obvious simply looking at government. However, an great example of a bad free market system (in my opinion) is the pharmaceutical industry. It is well known that they intentional pick inferior drugs to superior ones simply because:

A) One you take daily (better profit potential)
B) Patent is running out so they new a new drug.... (Exclusivity Increased profit)

In short, there are some industries that do best in a socialism model (or highly regulated), and others that do not...

Everyone knows that the best way to have the fastest wireless and internet service is to have a free market system. I mean, my free market AT&T service is spectacular giving me at least 2kbps (at least when there is no one else on the network), which is perfect for... well.. Wireless is VERY expensive to do and people in the US could never afford 1000M anyway. Also, the US is WAY to large for 1000M wireless internet... Oh, and having 1000M wireless internet wouldn't be safe anyway because of... terrorists..

The point is everyone knows that a free market system where private enterprise blazes the way is always the best path to prosperity. I mean its like American and stuff...

(Brought to you by the American Telecom Industry)

The article made it seem like they re-designed the network. I mean if this is the best IETF can muster, then that is just plain sad... All they appeared to do was reduce broadcast sensitivity, and forced channel selection. Heck, they didn't even use basic tools that any network technician would have on his truck for doing basic diagnosis. WOW!! AMAZING WORK "SUPER GEEKS" !!!!

Suggestion to the Hotel... Instead of relying on a bunch of guys with flashy badges talking endlessly about how smart they are, why not just hire a network consulting firm to do a generic network topography and build out the network correctly? The stuff is not rocket science... And the best part that the company can actually support the setup later when you need support. I am guessing that will be a little difficult for a bunch of guys who "kind of" know what they are talking about..

I think it depends on the person. I clearly have seen older developers that are beyond their prime, but I have also seen young developers who are so ADD that they never stand a chance of going far in the profession. Like any professional, the individual needs to stay current on skills as well as fit mentally and physically. And yes, being fit is rather important as you get older and makes a huge difference in your mental abilities. Most importantly, however, the individual (old or young) must earn the company more than they make.

Good Point... The key point I think most miss is that their career, like a company, either moves forward or backwards.

I agree that your approach is an equal (and less risky) approach. Either career path one chooses, however, still requires a substantial re-investment of some kind, which I think the vast majority of technical people tend to forget.

Also, I find it humorous on the discussions of a $150K developer being laid off because he costs so much. I think many have lost touch with the realities of how businesses run. If that employee is billing out consistently to a entrenched happy client for 40 hours @ $165 per hour, then I would say his compensation is a bargain. Also, if that employee is doing nothing more than keeping the lights running, then I would make the argument that he should never had gotten that level of compensation to begin with.

Look no further than the Fukushima "incident" to answer that question....

Keep in mind that Japan has a much large aging population than the US. Also, clearly this poster does not realize that age and wisdom do not always correspond.. Respect must be earned in my opinion...

Clearly you statement makes too much sense to be true... Also, clearly you have never been in the presence of your typically executive who thinks the answer to all of worlds problems is to outsource everything except his own job....

Older and Younger employees, in my opinion, are like apples and oranges.

Your internal talent which is what separates you from your competitors are what your older employees are for. The ones who naturally do not want to improve themselves over time are naturally weeded out. The ones I have found that are best generally (not always) are individuals who workout early in the morning, stay fit, and still maintain a professionalism in their 40's that a free out of school college student typically use a a mentor type.

Your young developers are cheaper, but require allot of training, mentoring, as well a allot of patience working with them. They are your future internal talent, however, so it is critical that you make sure you spend the time to help them grow their careers even if it is not eventually with my company.

Age is a minor issue if you ask me. A larger issue is that you tend to hit a wall on compensation around your early 30's. Meaning, my experience is that around $130K consistantly is about the best you can do working for someone. Once you reach that barrier, the logical next step is to start building/marketing your own products/services. Personally, I am not a big fan of services because you have to keep your work performance at such a rate that burnout because a big issue. Also, being an older developer, the advantage you have over younger developers is that hopefully you have saved a good part of that high salary rather than blowing it on fast cars and houses so that it opens up options for you...

In short... As a developer, you need to either grow or dwindle. Some do not have the skills/desire to move forward. For those, the decline in wages and stagnation of performance is clearly going to be a problem over the long haul.