|
So what things CAN you paste? Does it happen on other computers, too? What effect does using a different browser have?
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
|
|
|
|
|
I can paste here:
In a complaint filed on Tuesday in Manhattan federal court, Nataki Williams said she was fired in April 2014 while on maternity leave, after Viacom ignored her objections to its plan the prior year to transfer Ninja Turtles rights to a Netherlands-based entity solely to avoid the U.S. tax burden.
And elsewhere.
No one else here can paste to Facebook, either.
We can't change browsers (IE 11)
Interestingly enough, if I F12 it and have the debugger emulate IE8 or earlier, I can paste to my heart's content.
There were no problems 6 months ago, as far as I know. Then all of a sudden you couldn't paste in a comment to a post. And now, today, you can't paste anywhere in FB.
It's acting like Facebook is using some bizarro textbox, instead of the regular one, or is running some script on it (maybe running it through its censoring algorithm), or something.
Frankly, I don't think a GPO could be set up just block pasting to FB, but not block direct editing.
But I'm hoping it's a combination of those two things, with our end being something we can undo.
I've googled similar complaints, and there were some a while ago, but none of the "fixes" did anything at all.
|
|
|
|
|
There is a way to remove a non-answer from a question I asked and let the question show again as 'unanswered'?
(I think most of the visitors in QA look for unanswered question, so I would like my question to show there - is my assumption right?)
Irrelevant - to member removed that non-answer alone (I guess it was the member...)
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
People can flag non-answers as such, think you need to just wait for this to happen and the non-answer to be deleted.
|
|
|
|
|
Over the past year, I have been really enjoying mobile app development. I has been fun and cool for me. When I first started, I thought it was a good thing that the industry is lacking in good mobile developers, so I could easily fill the gap in a few years. Now I'm not so sure. Mobile development is really cool, and is something I love to do but with this whole no-code required citizen developer crap and the push to teach 10 year olds how to code, I'm not so sure. I don't want to spend time really getting good at something just to find out that no one needs the skill because they can "do it themselves".
What do y'all think, is native mobile application development a lost cause? Should I go back to doing something else?
i cri evry tiem
|
|
|
|
|
James_Parsons wrote: Should I go back to doing something else?
Yes, you should 
It seems you didn't pick mobile development because it was fun, but because you thought it's career opportunity. Indeed it looks like it is very valuable skill right now in time there "supply" of developers is much smaller than "demand". Will it stay the same forever? Definitely not. Will it stay the same for next 2,3 or 4 years? I don't know. No one really does.
I've learned how to program long before I was thinking what I want to do for a living. I've learned it because it was fun and I'm still doing it because it is fun. Oh, and I'm getting paid for it.
But if things went different back then or programmers wouldn't be in high demand, I could end as someone else, but still programming for fun.
TL;DR:
If you picked up mobile dev only because it is in high demand NOW, you made mistake. If you picked it because it is fun, than why bother what 10 year old can do in drag-drop programming?
--
"My software never has bugs. It just develops random features."
|
|
|
|
|
Deflinek wrote: Indeed it looks like it is very valuable skill right now in time there "supply" of developers is much smaller than "demand". Will it stay the same forever? Definitely not.
You must live in a different country than me. Because that isn't going to happen here.
There can be regions that get overstaffed but that only happens when one gets sucked into a region with a lot of companies doing the same and then they all go bust. So just plan ahead for that and it is all good.
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO, we should attempt to do what most 10-year olds cannot do, like coding for algorithms, OS kernels, reasonably advanced math, compilers, 3D geometry, etc.
Platform independent, that is. Becomes immaterial whether it is mobile, or web, or ... the good old desktop.
|
|
|
|
|
These "kiddy" development tools can only reach a simple quality and structure. So your coding skills must go further, for instance in security or UI design.
Mobile devices wont go away. I think the will replace the desktop PC in a lot of cases and will extend for TV and cloud access. Like Apple TV: development is like for iPhone.
Press F1 for help or google it.
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
Desktop (and laptop) sales are going down.
Mobile development will continue to gain momentum as more and more professional applications are converted from desktop to mobile.
Hardware will be more and more "internet" aware, so that there will be no need to be physically connected to a desktop PC; people will be able to connect directly to it from their own mobile device.
For example, medical equipment will be able to directly talk to the medical team from every where, same thing for engineering applications or other fields.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
Maximilien wrote: Desktop (and laptop) sales are going down.
I would like a dollar for each of those "down" sales for last year. Just last year.
Actually I would be good with even a penny.
|
|
|
|
|
Maximilien wrote: Desktop (and laptop) sales are going down.
Perhaps, but the installed base is immense. There's no lack of things to do in the desktop.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, the rise of the "crapp". All focused on not doing anything of substance (that would involve writing actual code, can't have that) and just connecting some different APIs together, I'm sure.
James_Parsons wrote: I don't want to spend time really getting good at something just to find out that no one needs the skill because they can "do it themselves".
Don't then. Why get good at such a specific platform? You can just look that sh*t up. There are more worthy skills to learn, and you no doubt already have.
|
|
|
|
|
James_Parsons wrote: no-code required citizen developer crap
Then again, who writes those apps? Not the 10 year old's. Think of it this way -- these apps are cool for kids (and even adults) who want to play around with their ideas, and I think it's great that these things exist, because every once in a while someone will create something truly unique, at least within the confines of the tool.
And that's the thing, once they realize the tool itself is confining their ideas, they'll start looking at how the tool itself works and discover a whole new world. But without that tool there in the first place, that world may never open up to that person.
James_Parsons wrote: is native mobile application development a lost cause?
Of course not. Today's software development is built on the tools and apps that others had to write from scratch. IDE's, databases, etc., and IMHO, these "citizen developer crap" that teach 10 year old's will eventually mature to real applications that us developers can use to insulate us from the specifics of a mobile device, but some of us will always need to know how to work with these devices at the metal!
James_Parsons wrote: I don't want to spend time really getting good at something just to find out that no one needs the skill because they can "do it themselves".
That's the thing, a technology will always be created that takes the skill out of something, but it takes people who are good at something to look at what their doing and realize that technology can free them from the (come on, confess) mostly drudgery, so that we can go forth with new creative ideas.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Like any other endeavor, there will come a time, or perhaps it's already here, where the do-it-yourselfer will be able to do just that. So, if we follow your line of worrying, no one will ever become anything that can be done by anyone else.
Or not.
A gardener isn't a farmer. Having a digital camera and Gimp doesn't make someone a photographer.
What you really need to consider about yourself: are you going to be any better at anything you do then a hobbyist? The answer to that question answers all of your questions.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
James_Parsons wrote: that no one needs the skill because they can "do it themselves"...What do y'all think,
People are delusional. Every time some new idiom comes along someone, usually someone selling something, claims that the 'end' is just around the corner.
It isn't going to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, I heard this argument in the 1980s that code generators will replace programmers.
Then, when VB came out, anyone could program Windows.
Good to hear it continues
Writing Non-Trivial Software is NOT a Trivial Task.
Building a company around a product, supporting it,
marketing it. Solving specific business needs (or marketable needs).
It takes real work.
That is like being afraid Open Source will replace all paid software gigs,
and everyone will be coding for free as a hobby. Maybe. Doubt it.
Do what you enjoy. When the work devolves into something you no longer enjoy.
Switch to something you do. The amazing thing about this field is that there
is a near endless number of arenas to program in.
We are quite lucky to be right in in history!
|
|
|
|
|
Just be better than (most) everyone else. There's a lot of crap being written out there.
|
|
|
|
|
They're only able to do that citizen code thing because they are consuming APIs that someone more able has created. Some of those people will transition into creating the APIs, but many won't be able to. You want to be one of them that can transition.
That said, stay with the mobile apps as long as they continue to be fun, but definitely grow your skills and knowledge in the API end of things.
We can program with only 1's, but if all you've got are zeros, you've got nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
The fact that citizens cook dinner does not make them top chefs. That citizens drive too fast doesn't make them race car drivers. That citizens buy medications for their sniffles doesn't make them doctors. That citizens wax loquatious about "what's wrong with this country" does not make them statesmen.
There's a huge difference between the dumbed-down tools that let a 10 year old kid draw a smiley face on his phone and the intense programming needed to make the same device run a first-person shooter. There will always be room for professionals. So you should bother to become a professional.
|
|
|
|
|
I have 2 kids in that exact age range and am witnessing this push to learn coding, and I can say with confidence that most of these kids are not going to get into programming, nor will it create a glut of them. The biggest hurdle is that most of them just don't have any burning ideas that they want to create, and my experience since I was 12 and first started learning this stuff is that you need a shining goal. The contrived tutorials where you make a music-search website, or make a robot walk the perimeter of a room, don't make you want to stay up late researching and trying to solve a vexing problem. It's only when you have this cool idea but no clue how to create it that you get the passion to push through the confusing and boring parts and not want to give up. Even the gamer kids don't really want to create games, they want to play them, because once they start learning all the logic required to make event loops and all the things you need to do to make something happen onscreen, they lose interest. I also think you're smart to learn mobile because it's a pretty clear bet that's going to keep getting huger. Even if the exact language changes (ie, you're learning Swift or Java right now and some new language comes along), you'll be in good shape to learn it b/c you already know the attendant concepts, like how to deal with a sudden network loss, and how to design GUIs for a small screen. This stuff is *way* too complicated to reduce to a drag-and-drop, "anyone can do it" design studio. In my opinion the bigger worry in programming is the ever-present preference for youth. I still think there's demand for older programmers (though I don't live in Silicon Valley so I'm sure it's worse there), but the problem I see from my close-to-50 vantage point is that I just don't live and breathe the mobile technology because it's not important to me at this phase of my life. It's more about family now, whereas 25 years ago it was more about "where's the next party? Let's organize a group trip to Vegas! etc", so if mobile technology was around then I would've been more immersed in it--all my friends would be up on the newest stuff, I'd be reading about it, playing with it 24-7, experimenting. At this age I'm content with a phone that makes calls, has a map, and lets me search the web in a pinch if I need to refresh my memory about the War of 1812 or look up the hours of my favorite restaurant. That lack of obsession with technology that just comes naturally with age makes it harder to come up with cool new ideas for programs that run on the phone. I guess to sum this up, I would say not to worry about there being a glut of kids programming for mobile, because it still takes a certain personality type to be interested and good at it, BUT be very aware of trying to keep yourself immersed in the new stuff so your skills are current (not coding skills per se, but current on what technologies are out there and what is needed so you can address those gaps, rather than suggesting ideas that aren't relevant anymore).
|
|
|
|
|
I have been programming for nearly 35 years, and I am mostly self taught. Sure I took a couple of courses at college at night, and a few seminars over the years. But I learned my first language by looking at a listing of a program I used at work on the left side and the language manual on the right ... and it all made sense.
For years just about every new language started out as a way to get normal people to write programs. Apparently it does not work that way.
Based on personal experience over the years, articles I have read, comments on forums such as this one, I do not think programming CAN be taught per se. I have read of and even helped folks with Computer Science degrees who cannot really do it.
A relative used to think I was the quirky brother in law, until a few years ago when he actually worked around programmers. He said they were mostly like me.
So I am not worried, and I do not think you should be either.
|
|
|
|
|
So we have a daily WebEx meeting with some guys in Bangalore. There's 7 Bangaloreans. There's 7 of us in the UK. It's quite a new thing everybody doesn't really know who everybody else is yet. Today, in the UK office, I was sat next to a lady of Chinese origin she whispered to me "IS Murali there?" I took a look at the screen and said "no". She replied "It's just they all look the same to me" 
|
|
|
|
|
There's nothing wrong with being honest 
|
|
|
|
|
PompeyThree wrote: It's just they all look the same to me
Yes, indeed. Two eyes, two ears, nose, mouth, ... same, isn't it?
BTW, I live in Bangalore, and will look exactly the same
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
