News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

fintuple

Re:Programming by poking: why MIT stopped teaching SICP on Wednesday May 04, 2016 @07:22PM (#11632781)
Why don't you take a look at the state of npm
Re:Programming by poking: why MIT stopped teaching SICP on Wednesday May 04, 2016 @06:40PM (#11632521)
I am simply expressing my preference and opinion.
Re:Programming by poking: why MIT stopped teaching SICP on Wednesday May 04, 2016 @06:07PM (#11632309)
My point is that it DOES. My single statement assertion was making that implicit assertion...
Moore's law is as much about economics as it is about shrinking. For all you code types, switching to a new device is not just as simple as fabricating a new chip in a research lab. Thousands of experimental devices and chips have been made in many research labs. Moore's law is about being able to consistently manufacture more and more millions (and now at billions) of very small transistors every generation (for silicon, this used to be about 1-1.5 years in the late 90's early 2000's).
Re:Programming by poking: why MIT stopped teaching SICP on Wednesday May 04, 2016 @01:12PM (#11629809)
Did SICP at Berkeley. Really awesome course. Thanks MIT for not teaching it anymore. Makes me a better programmer than your new grads now. Hah!
Re:Is the tech bubble popping? Ping pong offers an answer on Wednesday May 04, 2016 @03:49AM (#11626851)
It's certainly not linear, though; I think it will be interesting to see what's better in the long run. It's obviously impossible to measure, due to unpredictable factors such as changes in industry and market and competition.

As a whole, though, I think people, especially in our industry, aren't stupid. Free food would certainly be a more competitive retention factor (than ping pong) -- barring that your company's biggest competitors in terms of hiring aren't also offering free food.