1. 4

    I’d think talking directly to the person in question would be the first step. Even before posting it on the internet asking for advice ;)

    Maybe the person doesn’t know or you aren’t getting the full story. In some cases, it might seem like that person is taking full credit when they are singing you praises and that message is just getting squashed by someone else.

    Talk to the person, that’s what you should do.

    1. 2

      I do not think that asking in our small niche of the internet would be a bad idea. Programmers are by nature of their trade a creative work force and most of us have been ripped off at least once in our career. It is how you deal with it that matters and what you do after.

      You are correct that he should know the full story before hand. Most of the times it only makes you angrier though, regardless of who is actually responsible and why. I would move away from an environment where ‘credit’ issues pop up due to ‘misunderstandings’. There are no misunderstandings and there are no coincidences in credit matters.

    1. 2

      Instead of trying to figure out how to make code look good, I’ve spent most of mine time tearing problems into little pieces because it’s the only way I can figure out how to structure the program. I found I wind up writing code that is concise and readable just because it would be more work not to.

      This is an interesting point and one that I found when I first started writing erlang. I didn’t know the right way to make big complicated functions, so I just kept breaking problems down into smaller and smaller bits. The best coverage I know of this very thing is from Gar1t http://www.gar1t.com/blog/solving-embarrassingly-obvious-problems-in-erlang.html where he refactors down a large function into smaller and smaller bits.

      1. 4

        You would think with recent issues regarding domestic spying in the US, some company would find it useful to keep something like OpenBSD in business. I’ve always enjoyed the OpenBSD experience, so here’s hoping someone with deep pockets funds it for a while longer.

        1. 1

          I’m working on testing tools for Riak. We set aside time after our “code freeze” to do all sorts of testing. This time around we broke out into testing groups, with the tools group focussing on building new tools to make life happier. I think most people think they will hate testing, and then they get into the guts of it and start fixing things that have been broken and annoying and suddenly everyone is happy.

          1. 2

            It seems like a unfair comparison to Gmail. Gmail from the start made users aware their emails were scraped to generate ad content. Facebook calls messages “Private”, while not being private at all.

            1. 1

              For more from Rusty Sears, he did a talk about Stasis at BashoChats 005 http://vimeo.com/53452735

              1. 1

                Good to see OpenBSD start off with the right choice of algorithm. I guess that’s kind of expected at this point.

                1. 1

                  Agreed, they are the one vendor we come to expect the right choices from when it comes to security. I wonder if there will be any shift from Linux->FreeBSD or Linux->OpenBSD as a side effect of recent NSA leaks. I hope so, because I really enjoy the BSD options and they could sure use some more users to keep pushing them forward.

                  1. 4

                    I really liked this:

                    Other projects use a variety of tools for this, but unfortunately none of them were invented here.

                    1. 2

                      We rival Google in suffering from NIH syndrome.

                1. 1

                  The catalog even lists the prices for these electronic break-in tools, with costs ranging from free to $250,000.

                  I don’t understand, one group in the NSA charges another group? They’re selling exploits to each other?

                  1. 3

                    I doubt they produce them in-house; that’s probably vendor cost. I’d bet it’s similar to the GSA catalog in that regard.

                    1. 1

                      Yes, what you said. Most of these devices are made by government contractors. Like other agencies and departments in the government, the NSA can put out a RFQ on a certain task and contractors will bid on that work.

                      Nothrop, Lockheed, Raytheon, etc. all have electronic warfare divisions. They usually hide under names like “Signal Technology”

                      The number of companies that do this type of contracting work is pretty large. Remember the attack on HBGary Federal? One of the things that came from it was HBGary selling zero-day exploits to the government.

                      Also, a shout out to Palantir’s Custom Solutions is also probably in order here just for fun.

                      1. 1

                        Palantir only has two products–one is for analyzing timeseries data (finance) and the other is for analyzing graph data (government). They don’t have a core competency in electronic warfare.

                    2. 1

                      Well, you’re reading an article sprinkled with weasel words like “impression” and “presumably”. Der Spiegel doesn’t quite know what they have.

                      1. 1

                        I bet a few items were from the GCHQ. That said, large entities do internal line of business cross charging, so the prices may very well be them selling to each other.