I was about to say something similar. It may be true that the ideal image of the entrepreneur is the exception rather than the typical for the self-employed, but I would say the same for the image the author paints of the career employee. For every self-actualized employee with an enriching network, meaningful work, and supportive surroundings there are many more who are just trying to make ends meet in a meaningless, toxic, soul-sucking environment. The grass is very much greener on the other side...
"Although the standard is a little more complicated..."
If you have ever read the software control category definitions in MIL-STD-882E you know that the definitions that this blog author gives are very much his interpretation. The actual definitions in 882E are a god awful mess. Multiple contradictory definitions provided for the same category. Additional parenthetical statements that are intended to clarify, but just muddy the picture further. Yikes...
I was just thinking about this. Exposure from a short is theoretically limitless. Some sort of derivative would be a better approach? Asking for a financially clueless friend.
Software is only subject to entropy when you touch it. In most practical cases these days not being able to "improve" the software is a feature, not a bug.
I have a hard time identifying with this. The premise seems to be that the worker is just a passive participant in the system, literally a ping pong ball on a galton board. If the end state isn't what is desired the problem is with the board not the balls. This in fact may be true in the large, but that is the same as saying that management systems and processes are for people that need management systems and processes, reliably producing mediocre results. There is definite tension in accepting that this mediocrity is practically inevitable if anything is going to be done at scale.
I know next to nothing on the subject, but I won't let that stop me :) If this has been sitting here for three hours with no response I might as well pipe in...
If you think the app might make some real money you might want to think about registering an account with a business name and virtual mailbox address. I didn't read the whole thread above, but that comes up early in the thread as one option.
That would mean the software would work well. I run that explanation against what I see in practice and in general it is not a good fit.
Along with procrastination (which might have noble motivations) an additional much simpler answer is that people just want to do the minimum they can get away with.
Another feature of tar (the 7-zip implementation, anyway, I haven't checked others) is that it will properly archive files whose path length exceeds the path length limit, and then also restore the files properly. Conversely, trying to zip up a group of files with paths too long appears to work but then results in a corrupt zip file that will not unzip. I'm no expert in this area, but that is my recollection. So if you have any doubts about whether your files to archive have paths too long it is better to tar them then zip the tar file rather than just zip the files.
I'd be happy with File Explorer not giving the circle of death and the green bar of despair on a regular basis. Microsoft, can you fix these basic usability problems first before shoving more bloat into the tool?
This article trips my BS meter for a made up story to illustrate a point. Of course that says nothing about whether the point it is making is valid or not.
Wordpad is usually my go to when opening a unix text file (without carriage returns) that Notepad renders into a unintelligible mess. Word renders it properly, but then typically requires a bunch of subsequent formatting adjustments (font size, etc.) for good readability.
The article is painting a picture that equates improvement rate of software to that of hardware, where in reality it is not even close in any reasonable view. And saying that software is getting better overall is a highly dubious claim.