It's worse than that - copyright extends to translations and derivative works. All programming languages are derivatives works of Turing Machines... the Turing estate must be jumping up and down waiting for this one...
This is exactly why copyright should have been left at the previous very generous 20 years. Now some fans can't use an unpublished script written almost 55 years ago? A bit ridiculous. We need to get rid of the "corporations are people" concept and replace it with something more workable.
Yeah, well they say that, and that's what I was taught as a physics undergrad but when I did my thesis proposal for my Computing PH.D. I was asked what I would do if a particular part of it didn't work. My reply, that I would then report negative results for that part, was not received well. I was pressured to leave it out and 3 years later someone else published a paper on the exact same thing showing the exact same results that I had predicted to the committee.
In my experience the academy is nothing like what it is described to be to the outside world.
Are they still copper in the US? If they are I believe they would be worth more as metal than as money. I believe Canadian $0.01 are an alloy cheaper than copper.
Some enterprising guy figured this out about the Canadian dime in the 1960's - the silver was worth more than $0.10 so he would take armored cars full of dimes to New York and sell them for the silver - iirc he made quite a nice little profit for it too!
but your ego would never let you pay me the $140k it would take for me to return your phone call
$140K? Is that all? That's about $70/hour - shoot my plumber makes more than that. And he won't work for you unless you're very nice to him lol. Same for the dry-waller. And the electrician who does the basic household wiring install is waaay above that.
The other key feature of college is that gives you a chance to see where the holes are in understanding/technology/methodology.
Or alternatively what ties things together. Where I did my Ph.D. comps we were simply given a list of about 50 books, told we were responsible for knowing the contents, and then given a year to accomplish that on our own. There were no course requirements although I suppose if you were weak in an area then you could take a course to help with that.
Other aspects of the testing were that the tests were supposedly breadth tests not depth tests, done in 5 half day tests in 5 sub-disciplines. You would not be told your mark (you could not challenge the results) - just that you had passed or that you had failed and had to leave.
I'm pretty sure it would have been illegal to subject employees to this kind of process but the standard answer to questioning the process was basically "well I had to do it."
Now the assertion that these were breadth tests was utter BS once you looked at tests from previous years. It was a gate keeping exercise where they could make up the rules in closed meetings.
But the one benefit to it all was that for however long the knowledge stuck in your head you could see the connections between all the sub-fields, how they related, how their problems were all aspects of deeper problems etc. It was worth it for those insights and I don't see any other way to have gotten them.
A few years later they dropped that process which was a mistake imho - hey, I had to do it!;)
Why would people even go to college once this becomes mainstream?
Because college/university provides you with things that others value. For instance a university degree shows that you are capable of staying in one place and working on a goal for 4 years. Similarly it shows that you are capable of delayed gratification. Your transcript shows whether you are a stable performer (most grades the same) or erratic (F's and A's).
An enormous amount of the effort in college/university is about certification not education. Remove the element of certification and university would be much cheaper to deliver.
Not only that but at $260/week you are going to be able to afford about 6-7 hours per month of lawyer time - as long as you don't spend any of the money on *anything* else. 6-7 hours is not enough time for a lawyer to be able to represent you.
It's amazing that the diabetes association(s) don't seem to have heard of this purported cure.
BTW since type I is juvenile diabetes and the good doctor says that type II is insulin resistance NOT lack of insulin what would you call someone who, during their 40's or 50's, has pancreas that become unable to produce sufficient insulin? According to the good doctor that wouldn't be diabetes type II.
You are correct that there are two different types of diabetes but they may not be as different as you think. I've read that there is now some suspicion that type II is also caused by an immune system reaction and Type II patients can also require insulin injections.
The urge to make type II all about "unhealthy lifestyle habits" should be resisted. Type II can occur without an unhealthy diet and without a large amount of visible fat. My father developed Type II in his late 50's and was less than 20lbs over ideal body weight for his height - hardly obese.
The urge to blame people for getting type II because they are overweight should also be resisted. Being overweight can be caused by a variety of things many of which are not under the control of the person, for example: medication side-effects, depression, sleep apnea etc. I'm not saying this accounts for the majority of case but it is not insignificant either so be careful about making assumptions.
Now "It's triggered when the body forms a resistance to insulin" isn't really correct - type II is not triggered by insulin resistance it is insulin resistance. Type II can also be from inadequate insulin production, for example from damaged pancreas - afaik this is still considered type II. With adults usually doctors say that type II is either insulin insensitivity or inadequate insulin production. There is a difference and you can be tested to see which it is but if you are an adult and diagnosed as diabetic health plans will not usually pay for a test to determine which it is.
A few hopefully helpful bits of info:
There is a genetic component to it.
It is not just being overweight but being overweight in the abdominal region. People whose excess weight is distributed over their body are at much lower risk than people who concentrate their excess weight in the abdomen.
Being diagnosed should require at least two tests on separate days that both show fasting (10 hrs+) blood glucose being over 7mmol/l - don't let yourself be diagnosed on the basis of a single test.
High blood sugar levels can be an indication of something else being wrong, for example the kidneys are supposed to start dumping blood sugar when the levels are more than (iirc) 8 mmol/L - if they are not doing their job then you will have high glucose readings. So make sure you get checked for all possibilities.
The cut off for diagnosis changes with time, it is now 7 mmol/L but used to be higher. Currently 6-7 is considered pre-diabetic but I've had doctors tell me there is no such thing as "pre-diabetic", i.e. if you are over 6 you are diabetic. If enough doctors believe that then 6 will become the new definition.
Make sure you are not dehydrated when the test is done.
Do not put much too faith in over the counter glucose meters - they are only required to be accurate to within 20% of what a lab test would give on the same specimen. In other words if it says 7 you could be anywhere from 5.6 to 8.4, i.e. perfectly normal or strongly diabetic. I have seen two very different readings from the same drop of blood, and very different readings from two different fingers etc. It's really shocking just how much variability there is.
If you test with an over the counter meter try to get a sample of venous blood not arterial blood.
Definitely do not diagnose yourself based on readings from an over the counter meter.
Perhaps most importantly, Diabetes type II is a progressive disease. Only some of the symptoms of diabetes can be managed by diet and weight loss. A specialist told me that nerve and capillary damage still continues even if you keep glucose levels within the normal range.
I've been holding off on buying a tablet. Two issues for me are screen related. The last couple of netbooks I bought were HP/Compaq for one reason only - non-glare matte screens. I really cannot stand the shiny screens that you almost have to be in the dark to use (or maybe dress all in black). Are any of the tablets providing that?
The other issue was resolution and size - I don't want a 10" tablet - it's too big, if I wanted something that big I'd take a netbook - although in part the Transformer addresses that nicely. 7" is grab-able without needing cases or worrying too much about bashing it - but I also want 700+ by 1024+ resolution (and on netbooks too fer gawd's sake!!!). On the latter issue alone I'm thinking of skipping a tablet altogether and just going for a Galaxy Nexus once the bugs have been shaken out.
So along with all the other normally desirable features of a tablet (camera, sensors, interfaces, storage etc.) a 7", non-glare matte screen with 700+ x 1024+ resolution... anything like that out there yet?
Now me, I like books. I always figure that when I have a lot of travel time ahead of me, I should sock a bunch of reading matter into my bag for those long stretches, so I don't run out. And you know what? Almost always, that stuff ends up sitting in my bag unread.
If that's why you're taking books then you need only one - Moby Dick - it will last longer than you need no matter the situation.;)
Do you know why you travel? To travel. To experience new things, new people, new places. Not to fuck around with a gadget...
I agree and that extends to those taking expensive cameras that are constantly in use - all the effort is going into taking pictures instead of actually experiencing and appreciating the location. I say that as someone who has been heavily into photography for a very long time. Just take a half decent camera that doesn't weigh a lot and only take it out once in a while - believe me nobody is going to look through 15,173 pictures when they get back from their 2 week trip. It was already bad enough in the before times when Bert and Sally would bring out the vacation slides...
My Dad was an amateur photographer with a darkroom at a time when that was pretty rare and in his younger pre-parent days spent a few years travelling through India and Africa. He came back with maybe 200 pictures - they were all great, told the story of his travelling and the places and people and looking through them after his death I couldn't imagine how "more" would have been "better" in any way.
Here is the thing. Science is hard. Thinking is hard. Most people would rather live a comfortable lie than facing the cold, hard truth.
Sadly I agree that the first two apply to an awfully large portion of the population, in the U.S. and elsewhere. Your third point is often true but that isn't what is always at work.
Often what is going on is that people become exhausted with argument and just want an answer - any answer. I watched a small group of people who thought they had a problem argue for years about whether the problem existed. The people who believed the problem existed were scared. The other people didn't want didn't want to spend large amounts of money (several 10's of thousands of dollars each) on something they didn't believe was a serious problem.
Both sides were tired of arguing. Along came a guy with an engineer in his pocket (or vice versa) and the engineer told them the sky was falling. He offered to do an engineering assessment for less than half what any reputable company would have charged and they went for it.
The flunky sent to do the study wasn't even an engineer. Then there was another meeting. I have worked with a lot of engineers and they would never have made the kind of statements the head guy was making at that meeting. He also said a lot of things that I knew were put in a very biased way but there was no good way to put this across to people who didn't have the intellectual skills to understand.
I suggested that before they committed to spending what would be a huge amount of money for each that they get a second opinion from another engineering company - a proper study would cost < 1% of the proposed project budget. People agreed but the elected committee put in charge cut the report budget to about 25% of what was needed and placed other restrictions on the 2nd company - to the point where the 2nd report was prefaced with disclaimers about this and stating that they were prevented from making necessary measurements.
So that second report said not much of anything and the project was pushed ahead. The people on the committee didn't want to have a dissenting opinion. They didn't want to have to argue about the facts. They didn't want to know the truth. And the whole group of people didn't want to have yet another fight about the whole process so they just went with the 1st engineer's recommendations. They didn't even take the simple precaution of eliminating the bias introduced by profit incentive by starting the whole process by making it clear that the companies who did the reports would not be the engineering company that would eventually be hired to do any work.
It was all very predictable - the group that thought there was a problem got someone to say they were right They didn't take precautions to ensure the people giving the opinion were as unbiased as possible and then prevented any chance of getting a contradictory opinion.
The other faction would probably have done similar things if they had had the chance. The only thing everybody had in common was that they wanted some resolution, any resolution, whether right or wrong. Half way through the project, when it was too late to turn back, it turned out the problem was nothing like what had been predicted - one guess as to whether anyone would admit that.
People want answers. Frequently they are not equipped to personally judge the answers they are given. Then they are given dissenting opinions which they are also not equipped to judge. Arguments rage back and forth. Eventually emotional burnout ensues and they just want any answer so it will be over with. Once they reach that point there is nothing, no fact, no logic, that will budge them.
See once again you show yourself to be an arrogant prick, [and he goes on and on and on in that vein]
Perhaps you have extreme difficulty understanding what I've said because of some language problem but I think your opening line rules that out as the problem.
What's left is that you are such a very badly twisted and angry person that you can't make a coherent argument because you see things through such a distorted lens that you are left claiming I said things which I didn't, reading into things what isn't there, making glib excuses (e.g. it's not that you were wrong it's that language changed and me expecting the normal usage of words and phrases is just being pedantic) and generally frothing and foaming.
There isn't much I can do but feel sorry for you. In neither case can you be communicated with in any meaningful manner. You are an embarrassment both to yourself and to young people and while I could dissect your posts statement by statement and show how ridiculous they are you appear to be so rigid that you would never be able to see it and I would have wasted my time. I can only pray for the poor souls over whom you might have some measure of authority because you seem like quite the petty tyrant.
Stop creating straw man arguments, everything is never equal which is the whole point of the problem.
See? An experienced person would know the actual meaning of that phrase, obviously you don't. They would also know the proper use of the term "straw man" and again obviously you don't.
And when the question is if that thing is better than some other thing, they both have just as much experience. Zero.
Why, because you say so? The person experienced with Tech A is more likely to know how Tech A will relate to Tech B than the person who is inexperienced with both Tech A and Tech B.
There is a big difference between wisdom and blind arrogance, you appear to fall very much in the second
I'm glad you recognize that obvious point. You might apply it to your statements.
See that the real difference between an arrogant sob like you and me, I never really think I'm absolutely right.
Since you don't know me that is a pretty arrogant thing for you to say. That you have to call me names says worlds about you however.
If it makes you feel better, keep making generalization and a smug attitude.
Uh Huh... not like you eh?
Then again someone who in their 50s and hasn't moved beyond software engineering likely lacks the social skills to properly convey their wisdom anyway.
Gee I guess people cant' just stay in a field because they like it then. Apparently in your value system you have to keep moving up the ladder or you have poor social skills. LOL that says nothing about me or reality in general and so very much about you.
Cool, maybe I can learn something from him then. It's always nice to talk to someone who sees things from a different perspective and try to learn from them.
Unless the different perspective comes from being around long enough to know more than you then it's arrogance right? Where are all these guys telling you they're right because they are older than you???? I can imagine that might happen from time to time but I've never heard anyone say anything like that. But you have no trouble stereotyping a whole group of people... you know maybe it's you who attract people who say that sort of thing.
Merry Christmas and watch out for that coal in your stocking.
You expect your age to equal wisdom and to matter but frankly it doesn't. It's just annoying and worthless most of the time.
All other things being equal, generally someone who works X years at something will in fact know more that someone who works X/2 years at the same thing. The fact that you don't recognize that shows an attitude problem on your part.
Even if it is pertinent you probably can't convey it in a way that doesn't come off as "I'm older, I know better, now shut up."
Maybe you have problems accepting that being more experienced than you generally does mean that they do know better than you. It is a particular arrogance of youth to think that age is a liability rather than an asset. By your lights you won't know any more 20 years from now than you do now, and that will likely include an inability to avoid wild generalizations and projecting a smug attitude. LOL I only wish I could be around 20 years from now when some young punk tells you that you are just annoying and worthless and he knows just as much as you do.
There may be some guys who aren't any wiser after 20 years practising in the field but they certainly are a minority. I suspect that among the young guys who do have problems with older co-workers the problem they most likely have with the older guys is that the older guys do in fact know more and it makes the young guy feel inferior to admit that to himself. I bet the same guys had/have a lot of trouble with parental and other authority figures.
A million? Is that all? No wonder so many Canadian tech people are moving down there. Vancouver is usually conceptually divided into Vancouver East and Vancouver West, roughly equal in size. In Vancouver West the average price of a detached single family dwelling went over $2 million this year - in my neighbourhood that's the price of a little bungalow on a standard city lot.
CIOs lament that they are unable to retain 20-something techies
Errrr, then maybe hire somewhat older people who are already trained and experienced?
Oh yeah, that might mean higher salaries and acknowledging they have lives outside the company... yeah makes better sense to just keep on hiring and training 20-somethings and watching them leave...sheesh
Slashdot Mirror
"We certainly don't like Harper & the conservative government"
Amazingly enough polls show that Beerdood does not actually represent all Canadians. Who woulda thunk it?
It's worse than that - copyright extends to translations and derivative works. All programming languages are derivatives works of Turing Machines... the Turing estate must be jumping up and down waiting for this one...
This is exactly why copyright should have been left at the previous very generous 20 years. Now some fans can't use an unpublished script written almost 55 years ago? A bit ridiculous. We need to get rid of the "corporations are people" concept and replace it with something more workable.
Yeah, well they say that, and that's what I was taught as a physics undergrad but when I did my thesis proposal for my Computing PH.D. I was asked what I would do if a particular part of it didn't work. My reply, that I would then report negative results for that part, was not received well. I was pressured to leave it out and 3 years later someone else published a paper on the exact same thing showing the exact same results that I had predicted to the committee.
In my experience the academy is nothing like what it is described to be to the outside world.
Are they still copper in the US? If they are I believe they would be worth more as metal than as money. I believe Canadian $0.01 are an alloy cheaper than copper.
Some enterprising guy figured this out about the Canadian dime in the 1960's - the silver was worth more than $0.10 so he would take armored cars full of dimes to New York and sell them for the silver - iirc he made quite a nice little profit for it too!
I had wondered about that but I really, really hoped nobody actually had that big an ego.
$140K? Is that all? That's about $70/hour - shoot my plumber makes more than that. And he won't work for you unless you're very nice to him lol. Same for the dry-waller. And the electrician who does the basic household wiring install is waaay above that.
Or alternatively what ties things together. Where I did my Ph.D. comps we were simply given a list of about 50 books, told we were responsible for knowing the contents, and then given a year to accomplish that on our own. There were no course requirements although I suppose if you were weak in an area then you could take a course to help with that.
Other aspects of the testing were that the tests were supposedly breadth tests not depth tests, done in 5 half day tests in 5 sub-disciplines. You would not be told your mark (you could not challenge the results) - just that you had passed or that you had failed and had to leave.
I'm pretty sure it would have been illegal to subject employees to this kind of process but the standard answer to questioning the process was basically "well I had to do it."
Now the assertion that these were breadth tests was utter BS once you looked at tests from previous years. It was a gate keeping exercise where they could make up the rules in closed meetings.
But the one benefit to it all was that for however long the knowledge stuck in your head you could see the connections between all the sub-fields, how they related, how their problems were all aspects of deeper problems etc. It was worth it for those insights and I don't see any other way to have gotten them.
A few years later they dropped that process which was a mistake imho - hey, I had to do it! ;)
Because college/university provides you with things that others value. For instance a university degree shows that you are capable of staying in one place and working on a goal for 4 years. Similarly it shows that you are capable of delayed gratification. Your transcript shows whether you are a stable performer (most grades the same) or erratic (F's and A's).
An enormous amount of the effort in college/university is about certification not education. Remove the element of certification and university would be much cheaper to deliver.
And if tv is to be believed then continuing to protest your innocence after conviction will make it less like to get parole.
Yep, a lawyer once said to me - with absolutely no trace of embarrassment - "The law is for everyone, justice is for the rich."
Not only that but at $260/week you are going to be able to afford about 6-7 hours per month of lawyer time - as long as you don't spend any of the money on *anything* else. 6-7 hours is not enough time for a lawyer to be able to represent you.
They did have these in 1963 and before - I remember an old Danger Man (Secret Agent in the US) episode where one of these was shown and described.
It's amazing that the diabetes association(s) don't seem to have heard of this purported cure.
BTW since type I is juvenile diabetes and the good doctor says that type II is insulin resistance NOT lack of insulin what would you call someone who, during their 40's or 50's, has pancreas that become unable to produce sufficient insulin? According to the good doctor that wouldn't be diabetes type II.
You are correct that there are two different types of diabetes but they may not be as different as you think. I've read that there is now some suspicion that type II is also caused by an immune system reaction and Type II patients can also require insulin injections.
The urge to make type II all about "unhealthy lifestyle habits" should be resisted. Type II can occur without an unhealthy diet and without a large amount of visible fat. My father developed Type II in his late 50's and was less than 20lbs over ideal body weight for his height - hardly obese.
The urge to blame people for getting type II because they are overweight should also be resisted. Being overweight can be caused by a variety of things many of which are not under the control of the person, for example: medication side-effects, depression, sleep apnea etc. I'm not saying this accounts for the majority of case but it is not insignificant either so be careful about making assumptions.
Now "It's triggered when the body forms a resistance to insulin" isn't really correct - type II is not triggered by insulin resistance it is insulin resistance. Type II can also be from inadequate insulin production, for example from damaged pancreas - afaik this is still considered type II. With adults usually doctors say that type II is either insulin insensitivity or inadequate insulin production. There is a difference and you can be tested to see which it is but if you are an adult and diagnosed as diabetic health plans will not usually pay for a test to determine which it is.
A few hopefully helpful bits of info:
There is a genetic component to it.
It is not just being overweight but being overweight in the abdominal region. People whose excess weight is distributed over their body are at much lower risk than people who concentrate their excess weight in the abdomen.
Being diagnosed should require at least two tests on separate days that both show fasting (10 hrs+) blood glucose being over 7mmol/l - don't let yourself be diagnosed on the basis of a single test.
High blood sugar levels can be an indication of something else being wrong, for example the kidneys are supposed to start dumping blood sugar when the levels are more than (iirc) 8 mmol/L - if they are not doing their job then you will have high glucose readings. So make sure you get checked for all possibilities.
The cut off for diagnosis changes with time, it is now 7 mmol/L but used to be higher. Currently 6-7 is considered pre-diabetic but I've had doctors tell me there is no such thing as "pre-diabetic", i.e. if you are over 6 you are diabetic. If enough doctors believe that then 6 will become the new definition.
Make sure you are not dehydrated when the test is done.
Do not put much too faith in over the counter glucose meters - they are only required to be accurate to within 20% of what a lab test would give on the same specimen. In other words if it says 7 you could be anywhere from 5.6 to 8.4, i.e. perfectly normal or strongly diabetic. I have seen two very different readings from the same drop of blood, and very different readings from two different fingers etc. It's really shocking just how much variability there is.
If you test with an over the counter meter try to get a sample of venous blood not arterial blood.
Definitely do not diagnose yourself based on readings from an over the counter meter.
Perhaps most importantly, Diabetes type II is a progressive disease. Only some of the symptoms of diabetes can be managed by diet and weight loss. A specialist told me that nerve and capillary damage still continues even if you keep glucose levels within the normal range.
I've been holding off on buying a tablet. Two issues for me are screen related. The last couple of netbooks I bought were HP/Compaq for one reason only - non-glare matte screens. I really cannot stand the shiny screens that you almost have to be in the dark to use (or maybe dress all in black). Are any of the tablets providing that?
The other issue was resolution and size - I don't want a 10" tablet - it's too big, if I wanted something that big I'd take a netbook - although in part the Transformer addresses that nicely. 7" is grab-able without needing cases or worrying too much about bashing it - but I also want 700+ by 1024+ resolution (and on netbooks too fer gawd's sake!!!). On the latter issue alone I'm thinking of skipping a tablet altogether and just going for a Galaxy Nexus once the bugs have been shaken out.
So along with all the other normally desirable features of a tablet (camera, sensors, interfaces, storage etc.) a 7", non-glare matte screen with 700+ x 1024+ resolution... anything like that out there yet?
If that's why you're taking books then you need only one - Moby Dick - it will last longer than you need no matter the situation. ;)
I agree and that extends to those taking expensive cameras that are constantly in use - all the effort is going into taking pictures instead of actually experiencing and appreciating the location. I say that as someone who has been heavily into photography for a very long time. Just take a half decent camera that doesn't weigh a lot and only take it out once in a while - believe me nobody is going to look through 15,173 pictures when they get back from their 2 week trip. It was already bad enough in the before times when Bert and Sally would bring out the vacation slides...
My Dad was an amateur photographer with a darkroom at a time when that was pretty rare and in his younger pre-parent days spent a few years travelling through India and Africa. He came back with maybe 200 pictures - they were all great, told the story of his travelling and the places and people and looking through them after his death I couldn't imagine how "more" would have been "better" in any way.
Quick, Phasers on full! Red alert! Red Alert! Lt. inform the Federation by sub-space radio that we have encountered the Kardashians!!
Sadly I agree that the first two apply to an awfully large portion of the population, in the U.S. and elsewhere. Your third point is often true but that isn't what is always at work. Often what is going on is that people become exhausted with argument and just want an answer - any answer. I watched a small group of people who thought they had a problem argue for years about whether the problem existed. The people who believed the problem existed were scared. The other people didn't want didn't want to spend large amounts of money (several 10's of thousands of dollars each) on something they didn't believe was a serious problem.
Both sides were tired of arguing. Along came a guy with an engineer in his pocket (or vice versa) and the engineer told them the sky was falling. He offered to do an engineering assessment for less than half what any reputable company would have charged and they went for it.
The flunky sent to do the study wasn't even an engineer. Then there was another meeting. I have worked with a lot of engineers and they would never have made the kind of statements the head guy was making at that meeting. He also said a lot of things that I knew were put in a very biased way but there was no good way to put this across to people who didn't have the intellectual skills to understand.
I suggested that before they committed to spending what would be a huge amount of money for each that they get a second opinion from another engineering company - a proper study would cost < 1% of the proposed project budget. People agreed but the elected committee put in charge cut the report budget to about 25% of what was needed and placed other restrictions on the 2nd company - to the point where the 2nd report was prefaced with disclaimers about this and stating that they were prevented from making necessary measurements.
So that second report said not much of anything and the project was pushed ahead. The people on the committee didn't want to have a dissenting opinion. They didn't want to have to argue about the facts. They didn't want to know the truth. And the whole group of people didn't want to have yet another fight about the whole process so they just went with the 1st engineer's recommendations. They didn't even take the simple precaution of eliminating the bias introduced by profit incentive by starting the whole process by making it clear that the companies who did the reports would not be the engineering company that would eventually be hired to do any work.
It was all very predictable - the group that thought there was a problem got someone to say they were right They didn't take precautions to ensure the people giving the opinion were as unbiased as possible and then prevented any chance of getting a contradictory opinion.
The other faction would probably have done similar things if they had had the chance. The only thing everybody had in common was that they wanted some resolution, any resolution, whether right or wrong. Half way through the project, when it was too late to turn back, it turned out the problem was nothing like what had been predicted - one guess as to whether anyone would admit that.
People want answers. Frequently they are not equipped to personally judge the answers they are given. Then they are given dissenting opinions which they are also not equipped to judge. Arguments rage back and forth. Eventually emotional burnout ensues and they just want any answer so it will be over with. Once they reach that point there is nothing, no fact, no logic, that will budge them.
Perhaps you have extreme difficulty understanding what I've said because of some language problem but I think your opening line rules that out as the problem.
What's left is that you are such a very badly twisted and angry person that you can't make a coherent argument because you see things through such a distorted lens that you are left claiming I said things which I didn't, reading into things what isn't there, making glib excuses (e.g. it's not that you were wrong it's that language changed and me expecting the normal usage of words and phrases is just being pedantic) and generally frothing and foaming.
There isn't much I can do but feel sorry for you. In neither case can you be communicated with in any meaningful manner. You are an embarrassment both to yourself and to young people and while I could dissect your posts statement by statement and show how ridiculous they are you appear to be so rigid that you would never be able to see it and I would have wasted my time. I can only pray for the poor souls over whom you might have some measure of authority because you seem like quite the petty tyrant.
See? An experienced person would know the actual meaning of that phrase, obviously you don't. They would also know the proper use of the term "straw man" and again obviously you don't.
Why, because you say so? The person experienced with Tech A is more likely to know how Tech A will relate to Tech B than the person who is inexperienced with both Tech A and Tech B.
I'm glad you recognize that obvious point. You might apply it to your statements.
Since you don't know me that is a pretty arrogant thing for you to say. That you have to call me names says worlds about you however.
Uh Huh... not like you eh?
Gee I guess people cant' just stay in a field because they like it then. Apparently in your value system you have to keep moving up the ladder or you have poor social skills. LOL that says nothing about me or reality in general and so very much about you.
Unless the different perspective comes from being around long enough to know more than you then it's arrogance right? Where are all these guys telling you they're right because they are older than you???? I can imagine that might happen from time to time but I've never heard anyone say anything like that. But you have no trouble stereotyping a whole group of people... you know maybe it's you who attract people who say that sort of thing.
Merry Christmas and watch out for that coal in your stocking.
All other things being equal, generally someone who works X years at something will in fact know more that someone who works X/2 years at the same thing. The fact that you don't recognize that shows an attitude problem on your part.
Maybe you have problems accepting that being more experienced than you generally does mean that they do know better than you. It is a particular arrogance of youth to think that age is a liability rather than an asset. By your lights you won't know any more 20 years from now than you do now, and that will likely include an inability to avoid wild generalizations and projecting a smug attitude. LOL I only wish I could be around 20 years from now when some young punk tells you that you are just annoying and worthless and he knows just as much as you do.
There may be some guys who aren't any wiser after 20 years practising in the field but they certainly are a minority. I suspect that among the young guys who do have problems with older co-workers the problem they most likely have with the older guys is that the older guys do in fact know more and it makes the young guy feel inferior to admit that to himself. I bet the same guys had/have a lot of trouble with parental and other authority figures.
A million? Is that all? No wonder so many Canadian tech people are moving down there. Vancouver is usually conceptually divided into Vancouver East and Vancouver West, roughly equal in size. In Vancouver West the average price of a detached single family dwelling went over $2 million this year - in my neighbourhood that's the price of a little bungalow on a standard city lot.
Errrr, then maybe hire somewhat older people who are already trained and experienced?
Oh yeah, that might mean higher salaries and acknowledging they have lives outside the company... yeah makes better sense to just keep on hiring and training 20-somethings and watching them leave...sheesh
Just young people??? Can't us hard working old people make a fortune too?