It's acceptable because the barrier of entry to programming is so low. Most people have a computer, or at least access to one. Hardly anyone has a fully stocked chem lab at home.
If you're doing the job just to make money, then you're no better than any other guy just doing the job to make money, and you shouldn't expect to be treated as such.
Nobody owes you a job, you have to have something to offer. "I just want to do a good job and make money at it" isn't going to set you apart. EVERYONE wants to do a good job and make money.
I wish I were you. If you're just out of school and are single, there's no reason not to start your own company. You can live on Ramen if you want to, you have no wife, kids, or anyone depending on you for anything.
If you fail, you'll be no worse off than when you started, and you'll have that experience you need.
Paying for food and housing is an orthogonal problem to getting a job in software development.
Obviously, by virtue of the fact that this grad is posting to Slashdot, we can conclude he's alive and has a computer, so he has living expenses taken care of somehow. The guy's obviously not working 24 hours a day. In his free time, he could develop his own software. How he pays the bills in the meantime is irrelevant to the question of how will he become more employable in the software development field.
I think the answer is that civilizations don't last long enough to communicate with other civilizations.
The underlying assumption here is that intelligent civilizations, past a certain point, are immune from extinction. That's a pretty egotistical assumption to make, especially since you can measure our history in the thousands of years, and our ability to communicate wirelessly in decades.
To the universe, we're not even a flash in the pan.
"Military strategy does not depend on people at home clapping harder"
It depends heavily on the people at home, especially in a democratic republic.
Especially since any enemy the American military goes up against knows that if they can drag the thing out for more than four or five years, the Americans will pack up and leave due to lack of political support.
The number one goal of military strategy is to destroy your opponents ability to fight effectively. That means destroying his willingness to fight just as much, if not more, than his capability.
This isn't a new concept, Sun Tzu wrote about it thousands of years ago, and demonstrations of it are played out every thirty or so years in human history. Why did Truman nuke Japan? It was all about destroying resolve.
The big mistake in this war was not accounting for the lack of resolve of the American public. Any leader who takes us into a future war without first planning for this deserves to be run out of office, IMHO.
Or what? What would happen if the manager said, "Ok, please don't do that, enjoy the rest of the movie?"
Would anyone *ever* find out about it? If someone did, would there be a huge lawsuit? Would he lose his job? No!
And if the answer is yes, then that's exactly what we're complaining about here.
That's being an automaton. Being a slave to some words on a piece of paper to the point that you put yourself in ridiculous situations that are clearly not the intention of the contract.
This country is going to hell in a handbasket because nobody can distinguish between rules and morality, and it's simply due to intellectual laziness.
That's a cool idea, but wouldn't it only break shell code that called syscalls after the one you inserted? Shouldn't you put the new one at the very beginning?
IIRC, execve() is syscall #11, so wouldn't your inserted syscall have to be before that to do prevent shellcode from executing arbitrary commands?
The layered approach is the greatest thing ever. The network we use today looks nothing like it did in the 80's, and yet nobody had to build a "new Internet" to get us here. Does anyone remember the big wavelength division multiplexing upgrades in the 90's? Or the shift away from ATM? No, you don't, because it happened without you having to realize it. (I know, unless you work for a communications company...)
In order to have this flexibility, you need to have a dumb network at the base, that simply routes packets as quickly as possible. Any tradeoff designed to increase performance will adversely affect flexibility, and I think we can all agree the flexibility is a huge win.
I don't think Linux will compete with Apple for a while. I think Linux may make huge gains at the very low end, where profit margins are so slim that Linux being free will be the deciding factor, like those new Asus $200 laptops.
Apple holds and will probably always hold the high end where people feel like they're getting special stuff for their extra money.
I think Linux will eat up the very low end then expand slowly from there.
I have nothing to add to your post, but it just struck me that being concerned about "only" having 512MB RAM in a laptop is laugh out loud funny.
I guess I'm getting old, but I remember doing a ton of stuff with my C64, being thrilled to upgrade my Amiga to 2MB, with a 52MB hard drive. I did 3-d modelling on that Amiga, played great games, and basically did the same things I do today, only in lower resolution.
Having 512MB of RAM is a godsend, and if I can run Linux or FreeBSD with FVWM, 512MB is more than I'll ever need. Plenty fast enough for work while travelling, or to use as a thin client at home.
Slashdot Mirror
It's acceptable because the barrier of entry to programming is so low. Most people have a computer, or at least access to one. Hardly anyone has a fully stocked chem lab at home.
If you're doing the job just to make money, then you're no better than any other guy just doing the job to make money, and you shouldn't expect to be treated as such.
Nobody owes you a job, you have to have something to offer. "I just want to do a good job and make money at it" isn't going to set you apart. EVERYONE wants to do a good job and make money.
Obviously you've never used Postscript as God intended.
Photoshop is for losers who need to constantly "see" the image that they're working on.
Eh. There's always an excuse. If you love it, you'll find time to do it. If not, then it's no great tragedy if you can't find a job doing it.
My primary job (not software development) is demanding, I have a wife and two kids, and I find time for my projects.
You don't need to work on something for years to make something good or useful. A couple weekends should be plenty.
I wish I were you. If you're just out of school and are single, there's no reason not to start your own company. You can live on Ramen if you want to, you have no wife, kids, or anyone depending on you for anything.
If you fail, you'll be no worse off than when you started, and you'll have that experience you need.
Paying for food and housing is an orthogonal problem to getting a job in software development.
Obviously, by virtue of the fact that this grad is posting to Slashdot, we can conclude he's alive and has a computer, so he has living expenses taken care of somehow. The guy's obviously not working 24 hours a day. In his free time, he could develop his own software. How he pays the bills in the meantime is irrelevant to the question of how will he become more employable in the software development field.
I think the answer is that civilizations don't last long enough to communicate with other civilizations.
The underlying assumption here is that intelligent civilizations, past a certain point, are immune from extinction. That's a pretty egotistical assumption to make, especially since you can measure our history in the thousands of years, and our ability to communicate wirelessly in decades.
To the universe, we're not even a flash in the pan.
"The first [system] attempts to directly detect alcohol in the driver's sweat and gear shift lever."
Sorry Nissan, only my wife touches my gear shift lever.
Badum, tiss!
Thanks, I'll be here all week, enjoy the buffet, don't forget to tip your waitress.
I think this would be extremely useful and efficient in a data center. Not every hard drive is put into a laptop.
Solid state storage will take a long time to reach the capacity and performance of hard disks for the same price.
In that case, you should really model the man's arrival time as a Poisson process...
Ok, first one who can replace an on-the-air Dateline program with scenes from "Hackers" wins.
Can't be just an affiliate in the middle of Kansas though, it has to be a major metropolitan area.
My apologies, I misinterpreted that.
:-)
I should warn you, mentioning that "not straight" part won't help you too much in the getting-hit-on-dept, especially among geeks.
You should just say you're into football.
"Not if you're a straight girl geek...I'm not; don't start hitting on me."
Then from the picture on your blog, you are one *ugly* dude.
If only I could give my funny points to you.
I'm trying to drink a soda, it's not easy.
"until in 2000 we reached a technology of 1048576 (that's over a million times more technological!)?"
He didn't mean it literally -- because if he did, he was wrong.
In 2000 we were 1048578 times more technological.
"Military strategy does not depend on people at home clapping harder"
It depends heavily on the people at home, especially in a democratic republic.
Especially since any enemy the American military goes up against knows that if they can drag the thing out for more than four or five years, the Americans will pack up and leave due to lack of political support.
The number one goal of military strategy is to destroy your opponents ability to fight effectively. That means destroying his willingness to fight just as much, if not more, than his capability.
This isn't a new concept, Sun Tzu wrote about it thousands of years ago, and demonstrations of it are played out every thirty or so years in human history. Why did Truman nuke Japan? It was all about destroying resolve.
The big mistake in this war was not accounting for the lack of resolve of the American public. Any leader who takes us into a future war without first planning for this deserves to be run out of office, IMHO.
"it's complying with a contractual obligation."
Or what? What would happen if the manager said, "Ok, please don't do that, enjoy the rest of the movie?"
Would anyone *ever* find out about it? If someone did, would there be a huge lawsuit? Would he lose his job? No!
And if the answer is yes, then that's exactly what we're complaining about here.
That's being an automaton. Being a slave to some words on a piece of paper to the point that you put yourself in ridiculous situations that are clearly not the intention of the contract.
This country is going to hell in a handbasket because nobody can distinguish between rules and morality, and it's simply due to intellectual laziness.
"a lot of Girls who wrote their paper in works needed it converted to a Doc or even .TXT format went to us geeks."
Yeah, I've got a life size picture of that:
Girl: "Can you convert my files for me? I have to go fool around with my boyfriend."
Geek: "Sure!"
That's a cool idea, but wouldn't it only break shell code that called syscalls after the one you inserted? Shouldn't you put the new one at the very beginning?
IIRC, execve() is syscall #11, so wouldn't your inserted syscall have to be before that to do prevent shellcode from executing arbitrary commands?
"because so much of your brain is taken up with thinking about the sex you're not getting."
Really now, when is this not true, no matter how often you get it?
Amen.
The layered approach is the greatest thing ever. The network we use today looks nothing like it did in the 80's, and yet nobody had to build a "new Internet" to get us here. Does anyone remember the big wavelength division multiplexing upgrades in the 90's? Or the shift away from ATM? No, you don't, because it happened without you having to realize it. (I know, unless you work for a communications company...)
In order to have this flexibility, you need to have a dumb network at the base, that simply routes packets as quickly as possible. Any tradeoff designed to increase performance will adversely affect flexibility, and I think we can all agree the flexibility is a huge win.
I don't think Linux will compete with Apple for a while. I think Linux may make huge gains at the very low end, where profit margins are so slim that Linux being free will be the deciding factor, like those new Asus $200 laptops.
Apple holds and will probably always hold the high end where people feel like they're getting special stuff for their extra money.
I think Linux will eat up the very low end then expand slowly from there.
I have nothing to add to your post, but it just struck me that being concerned about "only" having 512MB RAM in a laptop is laugh out loud funny.
I guess I'm getting old, but I remember doing a ton of stuff with my C64, being thrilled to upgrade my Amiga to 2MB, with a 52MB hard drive. I did 3-d modelling on that Amiga, played great games, and basically did the same things I do today, only in lower resolution.
Having 512MB of RAM is a godsend, and if I can run Linux or FreeBSD with FVWM, 512MB is more than I'll ever need. Plenty fast enough for work while travelling, or to use as a thin client at home.
Sign me up for one of these, I love the specs.
It's used so rarely in the US that it might as well not exist. Therefore there's no abbreviation, because we never talk about it.
...but will it run FreeBSD?
As is the argument that an engineer can't be culturally literate, or produce culture of value.