ohaideredevs

Whatever the rules are, I am guessing they are relaxed around civil operations. Pararescuemen (USAF PJs) were deployed for search& rescue during hurricane relief operations.

More if you want to dig into it: https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/News/Article/Article/164568...

I can think of two unofficial reasons:

1. Keep their skills up. 2. Avoid waste of available resources.

No. The Iraq War did not pose a risk to the US.

You and I both know the goal of that was to get Hirohito to surrender and that Japan lost most of it strike capability. If strike capability is present, it's a priority.

You aren't hitting cities with nukes, you are hitting launch sites, command centers, AFBs, naval facilities, carrier battle groups, etc.

Sure, in all out war, you will hit a few major cities, but only a small percentage of the nukes will go there.

Fair point nonetheless.

Then the article is likely talking about anti-ship missiles (AShMs). Every "real" country can overwhelm a naval battle group of any other "real" country with guided missiles. A lot of these missiles can be fired from the shore.

AShMs defenses are very questionable when it comes to supersonic/hypersonic AShMs.

It holds and China only has 300 nukes, which isn't even close to the US and Russian numbers, which both have more experience handling them. Bait-y headline.

Can you elaborate on this please, or link me? I am genuinely interested - do they build their own servers or something?

I know they lay down their own network cables.

I get the point, but you could also argue that big companies want people who are strong on fundamentals and consider them something you shouldn't forget.

As in, the army won't hire a 40 year old for SOF if they can't run just as fast as the 18 year old can, even though they PREFER >30 candidates for, say Green Berets, but ANY candidate is useless if they can't meet basic fitness standards.

Same idea here, to some degree.

Can you write cleaner code and foresee problems as you get older. For sure.

Do a lot of older people get complacent, forget everything, or never knew anything? For sure, and I think they are testing for that.

Ageism is real and scary, but you also have to be proactive in defending yourself against it.

I have seen young devs try to devour an older dev, but they stay away when said older dev schools them.

"It's the second time in a few months I'm being turned down with the pretext of a failed whiteboard interview. Things like improper syntax and not getting the damned recursive solution fast enough."

Is it a pretext, or did you actually fail the interview? I want to work for West-coast-pay company at some point, and it seems that the idea there is for me to spend 6 months learning stuff I will never use, so I can compete with the kids who spent 4 years learning mostly stuff they will never use.

That is, if I fail it, it's not because I am older, it's because I don't know stuff fresh grads know.

IT is full of grinding pretty meaningless stuff (especially at lower levels), as much as we romanticize it.

It's been done: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JATO The primary requirement for a carrier jet is two engines, decent thrust, and enough body rigidity to take landings. The F-22 has all that. The MIG-29 had less, and had a carrier version. Same with the SU-27.

I don't mean to get into the weeds here, but what part of EODAS can't be added by literally putting a thermal camera (from the F-35 program) in several places on the F-22 and running wiring to it?

I completely understand that it interfaces with the helmet. I also know that it took ages for the F-22 to get a simple FLIR built in, but if even a fraction of the F-35 resources were directed at the F-22, this would all be more than doable quickly.

As far as I am concerned, the selling pitch of the F-35 is the STOVL and EODAS. At that point the F-22 could be fitted for carrier operations, because no one uses VTOL (or plans to) on the F-35 anyway except for moving it around parking lots with no ordinance.

Again, this is ignoring all the political info.

Also, to get more specific, I don't know of any "sensors built into its skin" - EODAS is just a bunch of little pods with thermal cameras and fancy computing. Obviously don't tell me if it's something that's not public knowledge.

Oh, the other argument for the JSF is that it could be exported to allies, whereas the F-22 is US-only.

Stealth Blackhawks (pretty much confirmed by the Bin Laden raid) are definitely an example of the cancelled Comanche program tech going into black projects.

>but nothing like the capability the JSF brings in computing technology.

What computing technology can't be put into the F-22? Iirc it has a much bigger radar housing, and EO DAS (fancy term for 360 IR / situational awareness) can be added to it.

To answer the parent term - the F-22 was used for air-to-ground in the middle east, so it can definitely fill that role. There was also an attack plane/bomber variant proposed.

With that said, I don't think "its old" holds.

Hue hue, but it WAS the theory. The F-35 was planned as:

A. The "light" F/A part of the heavy/light fighter model.

B. Meant to save costs by having one aircraft with shared parts (across the three models) fill virtually all roles.

"The Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor is one of the world’s premier fighter jets, thanks to its unique combination of stealth, speed, agility, and situational awareness."

A huge understatement. It's the only true 5th gen that's tailored for performance, rather than cost savings (ala the F-35). The others are completely unproven (Chinese) or both unproven and in extremely limited quantities, while not providing true stealth (PAK FA, though if anything, the SU-35 family is the closer analogue).

"unless I murder myself with study and ignore my family"

I think this is completely true as well. To move past senior developer, you fall into one of these camps:

1. Very bright.

2. Spent a LOT of time studying or messing around with the right tech on your own.

3. Sell your soul, i.e. ignore (or not have) family/kids.

A lot of people from camp #1/2 don't understand that for most, #3 is the only option (in the short term). There is also the very real tradeoff of not going with #3 and risking declining job prospects/salary.

I think this is doubly painful for devs, because they are generally used to quick career progression / salary bumps, and then it stalls hard at senior dev.

It's a legitimate concern. I spent 4 months of evenings and weekends(could have been one or two to be honest) to prep for the Google Cloud Architect exam. I have used NONE of this knowledge (past what I already knew - load balancing and spinning up VMs/containers...I think I used Dataprep instead of a Excel once too for shits and giggles).

I am looking to spend another 4 months learning ML, which I likely won't apply in any way.

That's a year down the drain with ONE cloud provider and ONE way of doing ML. It's easy to completely waste your life like this WITHOUT getting better at your job.

Carry-over is far more limited than people make it out to be, unless you REALLY know a lot, but those people are rare.

Don't know sctb, but I have had run-ins with dang on multiple occasions where he asked me to stop arguing when I felt I wasn't being hostile. Nonetheless, it's always in a very moderate tone of doing his job, rather than trying to express power, and I respect that. (Nor am I implying that I didn't take the arguments too far, in some cases I did)

The real proof that they do their job though is that I can still occasionally fine deep insights here that just aren't available in other places.

Some other questions, and a purely subjective ones at that:

1. Do you feel software or law is harder / more stressful?

2. Do you feel that devs or lawyers are "smarter" on average? Specifically at same pay scales - so partner vs architect / senior dev vs senior associate, etc.

3. Do you feel significant culture differences?

Any other notable positives and negatives that are significantly different between the two?

Interesting, thanks. I always wondered if there is carry over to law if you know say, finance or SE well.

Would you say a lawyer can make more / be more employable than the average lawyer if they can take software-related cases?

What specifically?

That's really depressing. Genuinely. If a candidate made a platform of protecting worker IP (created on their own time), I would vote for that candidate based on that alone.

I can see myself actually using this site, which is a very rare reaction to these for me.

The only thing that scares me is the IP factor if I work on stuff after work.

From what I am hearing, if I am not in Cali, I am at risk even if I don't use company time/equipment?

Amazon pretty much doubles salaries in areas outside of California, so it's extremely appealing money-wise if you stick around for the vest.

Ecosystem, sure, but I am still using the JavaScript I learned x years ago when I need to see how something is implemented in Angular or React under the hood, etc.

Right, let's say you are 35, you already changed careers once. If you have a family and you aren't rich, you are stuck, that's it, your life is over.

And if you are not? Let's say you got to med school, and let's say everything goes PERFECTLY. You are still 47 with $200,000 in student loan debt, what was the point?

Or you to the army because you always wanted to be a Green Beret, now you are 41 with your career dead and a path into management.

You can still take risks, like starting a business, but now the cost is very real. The question of "When do I start living. What's the grind actually for?" starts to become very real.

Good stuff. Edit: But I still don't get it. Would need to spend some time with it. Can't help but feel like the goal back then really was to educate, whereas now it's to fill pages and sell new editions.

Dramatic, but CS50 is a good example of it - it starts of super simple, but builds on that simplicity. Same with these videos.