|
sasadler wrote: being an embedded developer for my whole career was the simple life!
Definitely! And you often get to play with cool hardware before anyone else!
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on what type of job you are trying to find. If it is in the database software development world you might want to look at no SQL databases like Mongo DB. If you are looking for a position as a game programmer you might want to take a look at Unity which will allow you to leverage and improve your C# skills. For embedded programming, you would want to look at the Internet of Things (IoT) and C.
Having specific skills and languages on your resume may get you through the HR review, but getting an offer and succeeding at the new job comes down to your ability to:
1 - Understand and solve problems.
2 - Learn and effectively leverage new technologies.
3 - Communicate clearly.
For example, if you are a core game software developer, I would expect to see the applications and systems you created, worked on, and how you addressed and solved some of the challenges you faced. Having Unreal/C/C++ on your resume tells me very little; but saying that you updated the unreal memory manager to address the unique needs of Gears of War, tells me a lot about your ability to read code you did not write, and effectively change it to fit the needs of a major game franchise. Naturally in the interview, I would dig into this area to discover just what you did and how you solved those issues.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a bit late in the discussion but I've been in the industry a long time and watched languages come and go. I now rely on Stack Overflow's annual survey which shows some surprising results.
https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2022/
Javascript still tops the most popular list and SQL and C# are still up there. Rust is the most loved and least dreaded but ranks at only 9.32% on the most popular list. There are other anomalies as well. As long as the technologies I am using are high up in the most popular list I'm quite relaxed about job prospects. It's not us developers that decide on the languages and platforms it's management and they are interested in a whole range of other issues like continuity support cost etc. I wouldn't pay much attention to the "highest paying" list it can be skewed by unusual temporary demand and small samples and can change very quickly.
Microsoft always cops a hostile beating but the MS ecosystem still looks pretty healthy. I've also recently noticed a few bespoke business systems being ported from Heroku/aws to Azure due to uptime reliability issues.
There are some things that can only be seen by the mind - JS
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
Happy New 'Thing', I read on yesterdays Email about the Norton password manager being hit. Ok I got into a heated discussion with a friend about them, All your things in one place to open everything? see a problem, I do, the old single point of failure. The same people who used to bitch as I had passwords on post it notes, encrypted (well, hand written) used Norton and another password manger I can't remember (LastPass? rings a bell), the whole thing seemed a bad idea to me. Opions Please! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
I too would recommend it. I have used it for years and I have had no problems.
|
|
|
|
|
Keeps everything local, do you install it on your machine and then have a file encryted for the passwords? So only one location by default?
|
|
|
|
|
You can do that, or you can put the password file on google drive or OneDrive and access that from anywhere. As long as you have a secure master password on that file no one else can get in, but placing it on an unprotected OneDrive or other file share does allow anyone with access to try to brute force it.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: As long as you have a secure master password on that file
What ever that means 
|
|
|
|
|
It means that if your password file is protected by the password 'pa$$word1' and other people can find the file in the wild you will find out what that means.
|
|
|
|
|
I've used Keypass for years, and it has only one problem. I sometimes forget to update it, and that comes back to bite me. For instance, I returned from a weekend away to discover my MIG welder had been stolen, so I figured I'd just pull the video from my security cameras. Alas, I can't remember my login details. Quick, of to look in my encrypted password file and find that I neglected to enter that device. Grrrr...
Curiously, when I was in the Microsoft Insiders program, and they hosted a technical session in Phoenix (Fancy lunch included), a manager presenting the Win2K Security details told us a little secret. He said, "You know how we always tell you to use different passwords for everything? Who does that? I use only one myself; it's "cantremember." I always got a kick out of that.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
One Password to rule them all? Trouble I think...
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: One Password to rule them all? Trouble I think...
As long as you keep the keypass file as safe as you keep the _one_ password safe there, I see no problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps not. I keep the password file on a key fob, which is stored in a safe. The Keepass master password is written and stored in a different safe. Now if I could just remember what those safe combinations were...
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I used to use my big brain to hold all my contact telephone numbers but fast dial and smart phones ended up removing the need for that. I now use it for passwords instead. I have a unique password for everything and just remember them all in my head. Easy peasy!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
From time to time I take a peek at the Europa Clipper’s clean room webcam. Usually not too much action takes place, usually it’s just some guys in hazmat suits moving around.
One thing that got me wondering is
what makes human built probes move through space? It takes years for one of them to reach its destination. Keeping an engine burning for years requires literary tons of fuel. Is a probe moving mostly by inertia (because it is easy to defeat the gravity force of the sun)?
|
|
|
|
|
Basic Newtonian mechanics: a body in motion at a constant velocity will remain in motion in a straight line unless acted upon by an outside force.
And since "space" is mostly a pretty hard vacuum, there is no friction to slow it down (like there is with a car or a ball on Earth, both of which are slows slightly by air friction and much more by friction with the surface they are rolling on). So the only effect is gravity, which is pretty trivial at that distance because of the low mass and relatively high velocity of the probe. The further away from the high mass bodies like the sun and planets the probe gets, the less effect gravity has on it, and the more constant the velocity.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Now, to leave our planet, it costs some energy. About 400-800 MWh?
|
|
|
|
|
There are ways around some of that: the Space Elevator[^] can use the mass of goods coming down to lift people and material up for free once built. The problem is the immense cost of the initial build, and the materials you would need to build it probably still don't exist (and it would be a massive target for terrorists as well).
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm speaking from current reallity and not what can be done in theory. I mean the range 400-800 MWh has been used for real missions like Mars 3, Vikings, etc. 
|
|
|
|
|
So moving through space is almost free. The only remaining problem is time. If we think in terms of human space travel that means huge amounts of food and water supplies.
|
|
|
|
|
Once you are up to speed, yes. It's getting there that is so expensive - particularly if you need to take enough food, water, and more importantly air for a long journey. All that weighs a lot, so you need massive amounts of energy to get that up to speed as well.
This is why you have replicators on Star Trek: the ships can't carry enough for 5 year missions. Look at nuclear submarines for a comparison: 140 crew, 7000Kg of food, just for 90 days. I'd image that the Enterprise also uses the replicators to "recycle" waste and "used air" as well.
Think about the LDSS Nauvoo from The Expanse: multi generation journey time, so it grows it's own food to recycle the waste and the air. No way could it carry enough food and air for that long a journey! (And it still managed to miss Eros.)
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
You could recycle. They are already recycling water on ISS. You could do that with everything else eventually. However that kind of defeats the purpose of life IMO: it puts you closer to an artificially grown piece of meat or a patient on life support in IR and further away from an earth dweller created by God to enjoy fresh air, water and food each day
|
|
|
|
|
Calin Negru wrote: God created sun
Big assumption, there ... I'd avoid religion here - it could easily devolve into trolling and a ban from the site.
Quote: enjoying every day’s fresh air, water and food.
Says a man who doesn't live in a city ... 
Try the air in London - every time I pass through it (about an hour in total) every time I blow my nose for a week after it comes out full of black muck.
London water also tastes foul, and the food is hardly fresh in most cases - imported from the rst of the world to the large part.
And London isn't anywhere near the dirtiest, smelliest, don't-drink-the-water-ist city I've ever been in.
Recycling water takes energy; food takes time and serious amounts of space; air takes yet more energy. And that power has to be taken with you as well as you'll be far from the sun for a very long time. Even at teh speed of light, it would take 4 years to reach the nearest star - and our technology is vary far from getting near that speed!
I'd still go though.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
