jmostert2

3 ms·

1.
by jmostert2 16y ago
First of all, IANAL and I have no real-world experience with your scenario either. Below is all armchair reasoning. That said, my chair is pretty comfortable and I reason a lot from it. Using patented technology without a license from the p
2.
by jmostert2 17y ago
Judging a blog post by its title alone is hardly fair. Raymond clearly explains what it's about in the post itself. No pretenses about full generality are being made. "Some caches confuse some memory leak detection tools" may be more accura
3.
by jmostert2 17y ago
The Dutch government is batting 10 for 10 when it comes to pushing through legislation that mocks the idea of privacy openly. Another stellar idea they had: gather fingerprints for every single person in the country and store them in a cent
4.
by jmostert2 17y ago
But "experienced" is another one of those glowing words (like "smart") that emphasizes you knew your way around in the past. This is an external marker, something other people judge you by and you can advertise with. When you have to solve
5.
by jmostert2 17y ago
"Lazy" I get, but when he says "dumb" I think "humble" conveys the idea better. You shouldn't be "too smart", but that's not the same thing as being dumb. Letting go of preconceived notions to get to the root of a problem may involve "playi
6.
by jmostert2 17y ago
If the code is really intricate, I refactor it to understand how it works (and how it ought to work, which can be an important way of spotting bugs). But even though refactoring is supposed to be perfectly mechanical and "harmless" (espec