|
If this happens, you should Nefertari. Just submit a complaint and you're all Set.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
So it turns out if i reference an older version of NHibernate in my project with NuGet, it downloads the dll alright, but it puts an assembly binding directive in my web.config which makes the app try to load a later version, with the result that the app breaks when I try to run it. Took me an hour to spot the damn directives, I looked everywhere else for the problem, checked every project in the solution for the correct NHibernate version. Eventually found the problem by chance.
Why in the name of GOD would they do this? It makes no sense at all ever to do that! Why must Microsoft suck so hard at most things they do? Why must they release so much crap and features I don't want without testing their goddam code?
(throws keyboard out window, sets fire to passing pensioner)
OK rant over. Just... grrr...
One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas, I don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
If you use source control you can spot these things much easier, just compare the working version with the last-known-good.
|
|
|
|
|
Mel Padden wrote: Why must they [microsoft] release so much crap and features I don't want without testing their goddam code?
microsoft was founded in 1975, and now you're asking that question?
Installing Signature...
Do not switch off your computer.
|
|
|
|
|
Mel Padden wrote: Why must Microsoft suck so hard at most things they do? Why must they release so much crap and features I don't want without testing their goddam code?
Until someone can do it better.
I also wonder how often our customers curse out the products we create. Yet we expect near perfection from Microsoft.
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Fair comment. It's just very frustrating. When have to implement a kludge I at least have the good grace to let the users know what to expect.
One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas, I don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
Gimme MS's resources, and I think I'd be able to have near perfect software.
Of course said software would be a lot less ambitious.
|
|
|
|
|
Mel Padden wrote: in my project with NuGet
NuGet. The spawn of the devil.
Mel Padden wrote: Took me an hour to spot the damn directives,
Been there, took me more than an hour. 
|
|
|
|
|
Are you bitching at VS, nHibernate or Nuget, 2 of which are rather nasty. Does MS own nHibernate now?
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
With the millennial generation (arguably) not really learning any new life skills outside of Facebook and "I has kittens" pictures and with the Internet helping us as people expect things now and for free as we grow up on Nintendo and not leaving the house. One can't help but wonder what the products and offerings and services of the future will be like. In particular the products or services of the future that people will pay for since now we expect so much for free in an ever-changing world of more, more, more. I'm sure robots will be doing the menial work (I mean before we have robot rights and free them from robot slavery but I digress) so what we consider blue collar products or services today will go out the window for most people.
Every industry on the planet, the longer it exists without real novelty, the cheaper the offerings of said industry become. Things get easier to make. Supply increases. Familiarity increases. Demand goes down. This will never change. For instance, now with web development... 20 years ago a CMS was a big deal. Nowadays, it's not only free but its expected. Same goes with entertainment. Used to be you have to pay for online streaming video content, nowadays you don't (e.g., go90.com*) or its dirt cheap. I mean even porn is easily accessible for free, so much that now Playboy had to change its lineup due to tatas in a magazine no longer able to easily make millions.
Personally, I think over the next few decades, people will pay for VR type entertainment as it becomes more widespread and the tech gets better. Mainly because it's new, and as we spend more and more time at home as a whole we need an escape that much more. But what about web development I wonder. What's going to make us valuable in like 20 years? With Web 3.0 and 4.0 concepts, the idea of social sharing and "intelligent Internet" will only increase more and more... so I do know AI study will pretty much become a requirement in the future. But, as we try and get more and more people "able to code" at a younger age we in essence dilute ourselves in the marketplace - tech wise.
Most things online people expect to get for free nowadays and as such our skill set seems less and less special to the layman with every passing day. So, I'd wager it would help to also learn some non tech things, as developers, as we evolve alongside the changing industry. The question is, to what? In my early 30s I decided to read a ton of self-help books and ebooks on dating to try and help with A: girls duh and B: people skills in general as a way to set me apart from every other developer out there. As development becomes more mainstream and understood by the populous, we have to interact with more people now. However, while I think everyone should do that, I don't believe that in and of itself is enough to help developers shine in the next few decades as we come out of the closet so to speak resulting from tech being in the spotlight more and more.
I hope this post doesn't sound doom and gloom. Every industry changes. This is life. Change or fall behind. What I'm curious to know is what are some of the changes some of the folks here are doing to help stay relevant in the future that don't involve technology directly? What are some of the crafty ideas going on here to help augment our coding skill set? I know there was a news story on CP the other day about resumes dying so learning to market ourselves differently seems to be a valuable skill to help us stand out, but outside of that are there any other changes coders are doing to stay valuable? Inquiring minds wanna know.
* May not be SFW depending on what you watch.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's a long one, so I'll check it out this evening... seems interesting though.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I read it many years ago as a boy, and many years later my youngest son did the same, unbeknown to me. One day he suddenly stated talking about it, which was rather weird in a way.
|
|
|
|
|
Kinda cool in a way... it's a small world after all ya know.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: In particular the products or services of the future that people will pay for since now we expect so much for free in an ever-changing world of more, more, more.
Like Code Project? 
Jeremy Falcon wrote: What are some of the crafty ideas going on here to help augment our coding skill set?
Well, I've written about a few.
Reading your post, I got to thinking, again, about the issues of psychology, education, mental health and mental illness, and so on. Certainly recent events have momentarily brought the issue of mental illness yet again into the forefront, but in general, simply observing my own thoughts/feelings/behaviors, I pretty much conclude that Homo Sapiens is an over-populous collection of the mentally ill. Like, everyone, dude. It's just that some (maybe most) of us fit into the category of "the functionally mentally ill."
That said, somewhere, somehow, there will have to be major changes in education, and I'm not talking about teaching coding at the age of 5, but real skills -- communication, coping, caring, etc -- that elevate us out of the cesspool of current societal norms.
Jeremy Falcon wrote: In my early 30s I decided to read a ton of self-help books
There you go -- we ALL need to do that, but somehow, we also need to get past our racist, prejudiced, nationalistic, egoistic thinking, but these are things that need to be taught to kids, so eventually, the so-called leaders of the so-called free world can be replaced with actual compassionate, empathetic, taking-the-long-view leadership. Maybe that's where genetic engineering can best help.
Anyways, I'll have to move this to the SB if I keep going.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Reading your post, I got to thinking, again, about the issues of psychology, education, mental health and mental illness, and so on. Certainly recent events have momentarily brought the issue of mental illness yet again into the forefront, but in general, simply observing my own thoughts/feelings/behaviors, I pretty much conclude that Homo Sapiens is an over-populous collection of the mentally ill. Like, everyone, dude. It's just that some (maybe most) of us fit into the category of "the functionally mentally ill."
I see it as society being delusional. And it's a result of doing less and sitting at home more as the entertainment values of being inside are starting to far outweigh the entertainment value of being outside to most. More so than ever in history. We're over compensating with pretend lives and pretend crap on TV and play video games and never walk outside where we're forced to interact with people, see more of the world, and grow.
I'm sure there are other reasons that contribute to this as well. But you're right, most people simply are full of sh*t and delusional about basic core things... they're easy to spot at least once you see the light. But just go talk to your average person about money and watch how they'll pretend to know everything despite the fact most people don't even have 1K in savings because they're that broke. Delusions.
Marc Clifton wrote: There you go -- we ALL need to do that, but somehow, we also need to get past our racist, prejudiced, nationalistic, egoistic thinking, but these are things that need to be taught to kids, so eventually, the so-called leaders of the so-called free world can be replaced with actual compassionate, empathetic, taking-the-long-view leadership. Maybe that's where genetic engineering can best help.
Marc, you're smart. Please man, don't get your information from TV. Once you see TV being made you get a better sense of how fake it all is. Politics is a game for uneducated fools who do not study history, economics, psychology, body language, etc... left or right. It's entertainment for the ill-educated that enjoy spending their time arguing rather than doing something useful with their lives. I too get caught up in the hoopla at times, and every time I do I feel dumber for it.
Marc Clifton wrote: Anyways, I'll have to move this to the SB if I keep going.
Somebody needs a hug again. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Marc, you're smart. … Politics is a game for uneducated fools… It's entertainment for the ill-educated… . I too get caught up in the hoopla at times… I feel dumber for it.
Jeremy, consider your own words in regards to your chastisement of Marc’s viewpoint.
I agree with you that finding balanced reporting to be a rare gem, it can be difficult to weed through what is presented as news by any outlet, although sometimes too easy, especially those that cater to a very specific audience. The outlets that offer no sources I tend to stay away from, those that do, I check them. As a result I end up smack dab in the middle politically. As I tell my hard-line friends, I am a staunch moderate.
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
S Houghtelin wrote: Jeremy, consider your own words in regards to your chastisement of Marc’s viewpoint.
Oh yeah I know. Marc and I go way back though. So, he has to like me. And he knows I don't think he's uneducated. I'm talking about the general folks that really get into it.
S Houghtelin wrote: As I tell my hard-line friends, I am a staunch moderate.
Exactly. Extremes are bad. In fact, I think if you talk to most people in real life the the majority would agree with us. However, TV caters to extremes... like click bait. Politics as far as TV is concerned is more like Jerry Springer here than anything else, and anyone who has seen Jerry Springer being filmed knows part of it is scripted.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: And it's a result of doing less and sitting at home more as the entertainment values of being inside are starting to far outweigh the entertainment value of being outside to most. More so than ever in history. We're over compensating with pretend lives and pretend crap on TV and play video games and never walk outside where we're forced to interact with people, see more of the world, and grow.
You mean back in the good ol' days when you sent the kids out to play so they could find some hapless animal to torture and then later on entertain themselves by watching the neighbor kid get beaten in the yard with a father's belt, then that night to see the police politely bring home the drunken council man, so drunk that the police have to help them walk, and the police helpfully show up the following morning to drive that same person back to the car that they were driving when the police pulled them over.
Not to mention the locally bully boys putting on their sh*t kickers and heading out for some friday night drinking followed up by cruising 'those' neighborhoods to find some gay guys to beat the hell out of.
Those days?
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Please man, don't get your information from TV. Once you see TV being made you get a better sense of how fake it all is. Politics is a game for uneducated fools who do not study history, economics, psychology, body language, etc.
Yep, good ol' days before TV when newspapers published actual fiction as news such as made up explorers finding imaginary beasts not to mention actual libelous stories written solely to promote the political goals of the publisher if not actually winning political campaigns for those same publishers. Not even that long ago when newspapers would not publish anything that might 'shock' the readers regardless of how relevant it was.
Not to mention of course actual vote buying was all the rage way back when.
|
|
|
|
|
You used a period again. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Dude, let's be real for a minute. Ever since I "e-met" you online, all you ever did was argue with me. I'm not sure if it's how you treat everyone or just me. This post is a classic straw man tactic. Fake news has nothing to do with beating gay guys. How many friends you actually have bro? No, don't answer that. I'm sure it'll be another online argument if you do.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Your post was implicitly suggesting some imaginary time when things were 'better' without defining specifically how they were better, why that was better nor even when the imaginary time was.
Jeremy Falcon wrote: all you ever did was argue with me
You are not special.
Even in this regard, many people here have posted that past times were better, while completely ignoring the reality of the past.
Jeremy Falcon wrote: How many friends you actually have bro?
That question of course has nothing to do with anything.
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Fake news has nothing to do with beating gay guys
No idea what you are suggesting.
However, in the past beating up gay guys was something that the police and law enforcement either specifically ignored and sometimes even participated in. And the newspapers did not report on it.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: That question of course has nothing to do with anything.
Answer = 0, or else you'd get it.
jschell wrote: No idea what you are suggesting.
Clearly
Go get some people skills man. Bye.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Answer = 0, or else you'd get it.
You are incorrect. And it still has nothing to do with this.
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Go get some people skills man.
Denigration is what people resort to when they can no longer address the actual points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
