Czarnian
Good luck, guys. It's a tough row to hoe considering all of the major agricultural machine manufacturers (Case, Deere, etc.) have some variation of this service coupled with world-wide dealer networks to sell it. If you think you're going to be able to wedge yourself between farmers and the dealers that they have been dealing with for years and in some cases generations, best of luck with that.
Interesting idea, but the best they can hope for is a talent acquisition buy-out.
This arrangement strikes me as the Company Town on a massive scale. Without a legal framework that exists outside of their own best interests, I don't see how this kind of thing doesn't devolve into the Company Town.
Yes, the Framers were a sort of political entrepreneur. They were the type of political entrepreneurs who allowed slavery to exist and came up with the 3/5ths compromise.
I guess I hold myself to a higher standard than you do. I have old-fashioned ideas. Writers should be competent enough in the fundamentals that even their informal remarks meet a certain standard of composition. When you are a good writer, you put the same level of care into your work regardless of the purpose. Quite frankly, a writer who thinks, "The editor will catch it," doesn't deserve to be paid for the job. It's bad craft.
I don't require perfection, just competence. If you don't care enough about your output to make it easily understandable (I don't have to put effort into deciphering your words), why should I care about it?
I prescribe a copy of Strunk and White with a healthy dose of proofreading.
It sounds more like he's talking about the idea tourist. The guy who truly believes that the secret to start-up success is:
1. Have an idea. 2. . . . 3. Make money.
I think we can all agree that the idea tourist is annoying. If all you bring to the table is something as ephemeral as an idea, just keep walking. I've got no time for you.
It looks like Square adhered strictly to their end of the terms of service. They did exactly what they always said they would do. Jason is the one who screwed up and then demanded special treatment and then got huffy when they didn't give him special treatment.
Dude's got no one else but himself to blame. If he's taking credit card transactions, he should be holding a reserve in the relevant account for exactly this sort of situation. His lack of foresight is the root cause of the entire mess. As the saying goes, "Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."
There are concrete answers to the question. Many languages are just flat not capable of being safety-critical.
One of the foundational concepts of safety-critical design is strict scheduling of resources. The schedule must be strictly deterministic. The process must get it's work done in the time allocated because the scheduler will move on regardless. It's why you don't do recursion in safety-critical systems. Strictly speaking, you're not even supposed to use while loops in safety-critical systems. In the five years I worked in avionics, the only time I saw a while loop was in code review where the person who wrote it (always a new person) was directed to take it out.
All that being said, safety-critical software production is more about the processes than coding. Even crappy programmers can be taught how to write good safety-critical code when the company adheres to best practices.
As far as the original post, Ada and C. Ada has tremendous support for concurrency and is stable as the day is long. Not much in the way of libraries, but honestly not that important on the kinds of projects you would use Ada to build.
Another big difference between physical engineering and information engineering is that when an overpass is completed, the project is done. If you're lucky, someone will come by and look it over or maintain it over the years. There's no such thing as "done" software. When a program wraps up, everybody rushes back in and starts monkeying with it for the next iteration.
If I heard you going on and on about how it's unfair that your expected to hid fear and put the safety of all the women-folk before your own, I wouldn't think you were a whiner, I'd think you have a damned screw loose.
Read what you wrote, man. We're not talking about the wilderness of Afghanistan, we're talking about a cube farm. Your macho baggage has no place in that setting. If you can't get rid of it, at least suppress it long enough to not burden your co-workers with it.
It's none of your concern why a woman dresses the way she does. As long as she isn't violating company policy, she is under no obligation to justify her wardrobe to anyone else. And if she is violating company policy, that's between her and HR, not you.
Last I checked, women generally don't like being treated like perks.
If it's a joke, where's the punchline? Were they not going to have women servers? Were the massage people going to be big, hairy, biker types?
Had they hired a bunch of Chippendale's dancers to serve booze (because alcohol does wonders for your productivity) and big hairy bikers to give massages (as opposed to the girls in tight t-shirts they no doubt retained for the event,) would be a prank.
Refine your data classification. On one of your screenshots, you are listing "Arrests" as a type of crime. That's confusing. Also, consider filtering for violent crime rather than crime in general. That would be more in line with the stated purpose of your app.
Realign the usage from a real-time application to a planning application. You don't want your users to be fiddling with a smartphone in a bad neighborhood. That really increases the odds of getting mugged and defeating the purpose of the app.
I agree with some of the other posters that you should tone down the alarmist tone of the app. If nothing else, it's more professional.
Congratulations on your experiment.
This is my takeaway from the article:
The pragmatic approach means that the company (media companies) should accommodate the folks who:
1) Are so emotionally damaged that they can't perform the simple act of opening a door without making a mess (pay a couple of bucks for content that they like.) 2) Are so ill-mannered that they have no respect for the people they share a space with (take content without the creator's permission.) 3) Are so poorly socialized that any attempt to correct their behavior causes them to act out like a 5 year old by making a bigger mess (downloading even more stuff that they don't even really want.) 4) Are so lazy that they can't be bothered to take the simple action of taking the towel back to their desk and putting it in their own trash can (using the distribution channels the creator asks them to use.)
I find his argument unconvincing.
He said that he's particularly proud of those pieces and that price pretty much guarantees that whoever buys it will take care of it. They'll put it in a proper frame and display it somewhere where it can be appreciated. As opposed to the less expensive pieces which may go in a sleeve and put on a shelf.