@HerrNyani as one of those friends, I can confirm this statement.

... if I got a euro every time someone asked that ...

Pretty sure action script is dead ...

@galileopy what exactly made you come to that assumption?

@ won't work, seems like his account is gone ...

@irene I don't fully agree, but I get what you mean.

Still doesn't matter, you don't earn money with knowledge/information/products/whatever unless you sell it. The selling part is where the money is at.

Even a mediocre or bad product can sell well due to good sales and marketing. Lots of examples of it as well. And the same applies to knowledge and information. You need people to want it, or at least think they do.

@irene we don't have to. We write the software that stores all of the information/knowledge. Which usually means we have access to it.

Besides, there's a whole lot of difference between having a product (or knowledge/information) and selling it. A good sales can (and will) sell you air. They usually end up with the money, not the people actually making/having the product/knowledge/information.

No it doesn't, all devs should be filthy rich if that would be the case.

Do you have issues with null values?

Cause that sounds a lot like a person I know that has issues with null values. You really shouldn't.

Null has it's uses.

... I feel like that's an insult to IT guys who pretend to know everything.

... oh god

Not sure there is, but I just invented one:

Monday mourning.

@netikras seeing as this is a new account, it seems like a bad ad.

@NoToJavaScript things like playing, sleeping, ... would just be object states if you ask me.

Make a calculated property State where you make sure the lazy cat can't return play, but the playfull one can.

ezpz lemon squeezy

@MattSK
I don't agree with the copying. Just split your logic from your 'pure' classes (poco's) and try to generalize as much as possible.

Basically, think in pure classes and pure functions as much as possible.

At least that's what I tend to do.

Let me correct that for you:

If you write anything at all, in English, you need Grammarly.

In any other language, forget it.

@C0D4 the 10x programmer

Depends on a lot of things.

First and probably the most important is there a technical analysis.

If there is it's usually doable to make an estimate. If there isn't you probably can't make an accurate estimate (even when falling back on past experience).

As for the estimation itself, I usually take my initial estimate x2 if I'm developing it, and x3 if someone else needs to develop it.

Makes me wonder what a Canadian virus will do ...

Seems like you're a decent human being, and they are as well :)

@M1sf3t
Not saying we trust all police officers here, but we have a special forces branch for that kind of cases who are extremely well-trained people.
And I sure as hell trust them to make sure casualties stay as limited as possible.

@M1sf3t
That's my point. People that want to kill will kill no matter what. It's better to decrease the ways available to them to kill so they can only kill the smallest amount of people possible. You don't do that by making guns available to the public.

You have law enforcement to make sure those people get stopped as fast as possible. As for bombs/suicide terrorists, there's no way to stop them other than their own stupidity (eg. the guy blowing himself up in Paris outside of a soccer stadium with no one around because he wasn't allowed inside).

@M1sf3t

Whilst I agree with the fact that owning guns does not make you inherently bad, I disagree with keeping them around.

We're all human, we're all flawed beings. Everyone can become a killer. Making weapons easily obtainable increases the risk of gun-related crime.

As for your points on armed robbery. I live in a country where there are extremely rigid gun laws (pretty sure less than 5% of people here own guns). Armed robberies are a rarity here (I think the last one was 7 years ago).

To me, guns do not have a place in society, especially not for citizens.

It's easy to kill with a gun, take guns away and you force people who want to kill to go in close and personal. Not only does that decrease the chances of actual mass killings, it makes it very difficult for most people to even kill like that. You have to be not only troubled but need a lack of empathy to randomly kill people like that. And the amount of troubled sociopaths/full-blown psychopaths in society is small.

Being human is also a correlating factor to being a mass shooter.

There might be a small fraction of already troubled people who get their final trigger by playing a violent game or watching a violent movie for that matter. That doesn't take away from the fact that they were already troubled.

Even guns themselves are a correlation. Owning a gun doesn't make you a violent sociopath. The problem is that you can't kill 9 people in 30 seconds with a video game, pretty sure you can't even clobber a single person to death with it in 30 seconds. You can with a gun.
And even when the 'good guys with guns' are responding fairly fast, people will always get killed when guns are involved.

TLDR; this isn't a discussion about causation. Troubled people will always find a trigger because they are troubled. The discussion is about the fact that guns can kill very easily and in large quantity, and video games cannot no matter how much doom guy you add to them.

@Stuxnet should be opt-in instead of opt-out though. Most people aren't that tech savvy.

Actually easy decision. Apply for a new job, wait till you get a proposal, go to your boss with said proposal.

@simonblack
Rofl

@simonblack the amount of space carbon will be only a very small fraction though. And eventually, they all go through the same cycle.

So that makes us alien pieces of shit.

Literally, everyone is a piece of shit.

(We're all comprised of carbon and nitrogen atoms that we're at one point part of some animal's feces.)

@AleCx04
'Countries with shit pay' ... like I said, depends on where you live. 18$/hour (net pay) might be 'shit pay' in the USA, down here it isn't.
It all depends on what the country you live in provides for you (which usually means more taxes but that isn't a bad thing), what the living costs in that country are (housing, electricity, water, ...) and what other benifits you get.

I know the US prides itself in having lower taxes and higher pay, but you guys do have to provide almost everything for yourself, and it all comes from the 'good pay' you get.

Not even talking about the costs state-funded services save you because stuff is bought in bulk for a large number of people, and companies tend to give serious discounts in those cases (eg. insulin is something you can get here for a few euro's).