this is cool. You know, most of the rest of the ChristianWalmartMicrosft States of America can't stand this stuff. And that's fine.
I hope California can just gracefully say adios to the other 49, best wishes, etc. Kind of like how Singapore parted ways with Malaysia when they realized Singapore was doing all the heavy lifting there.
I'm guilty of both. But honestly, two institutions that are failing millions and are now thankfully crumbling are "college" and "marriage". The two most overrated aspects of American life, and both cause lots of remorse and compromised lives.
What will happen next is good, and healthy: the dull institutions will crumble, while their mission will live on in some new way. *Learning* is good, I suspect we'll see lifelong learning replace 4 years and a sheepskin.
More the opposite, Business hates smart people
on
Tech Vs. Business?
·
· Score: 1
Business people are not as bright as IT people who are not as bright as scientists and doctors.
Don't believe me? Google back for the vitriol toward techies that came out of Wall Street in the months prior to Google's IPO, when Google was adamant that fairness prevail in the allocation of IPO shares. Lots of red-faced thundering from the suits about these upstart tech weenies... it's kind of funny now, how confident the suits were the GOOG would fail because "they're all engineers, no business skills."
Marriage is the worst thing that can happen to you. Worse than a car accident, in most cases.
Read "Faster, Better, Lighter Java" by B. Tate
on
Java, Where To Start?
·
· Score: 1
Tate is now a RoR fan, but his take on good Java coding is a nice read. The book itself won't tell you how to code Java syntax, but it really underscored a lot of things I'd learned myself.
In brief, whatever you do with Java or other languages, listen to your instincts when vendors and "architects" start pushing high falutin', sea-going, top heavy "solutions" on you. Yes, IBM, I'm talking to YOU.
In fairness some architects are OK guys. But watch out for the ones that make simple problems complicated. Complexity should come from the business problem you are solving, not from wrestling with a framework to retrieve a string from a database;P
www.nomarriage.com is another good one as a primer.
I can't speak to the web design of either site. But the information on both is pretty good, and very, very relevant for young men today. There's one other, just an article, that's also quite good with a different spin but similar conclusions:
http://www.martynemko.com/articles/gold-diggers-are-alive-and-well-in-2006_id1222
Get thee educated on these realities, my friend.
SlashDot is up to almost a million for uid. Statistically, there's got to be at least 10 user's that are/were married at some point in their lives. Hell, I'll go out on a limb and say 15.
God, what I would give to turn back the clock. Do not get married guys. Talk to a good sampling of men in their 40s and 50s to get real wisdom on life and marriage. MARRIAGE ABSOLUTELY SUCKS.
Without exaggeration, I can say that marriage is the single worst volitional act that a man can make in the U.S. today. I mean, you can enlist and decide it was a bad idea, but then you can just not re-enlist. With marriage and divorce law, there is NO WAY TO REALLY UNDO A MARRIAGE. It's like losing your legs in a car accident. You can adapt as best you can, but you cannot reclaim what you have lost.
Dude, marriage is misery. It is the single most important FINANCIAL decision you will ever make. For your own sanity, be sure you have researched the pros and cons of the legal corporation that you are looking to sign onto.
Mortality rates for married vs. single are based on people born in the 1930s or even 1920s. For those age cohorts, only the very sickly or very ugly did not get married, it was standard issue social behavior for their time. Correlation != causation, as always. Being married did not make people healthy, it was the other way around.
Now, look at people today and it's obvious to a casual observer that a whole different dynamic is at work. The data backs it up: not only are the people who stay single happier ( http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/women-are-happiest-with-first-love-and-men-with-serial-monogamy-study-finds-577451.html ) but they don't get as fat as married people (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-10-22-marriage-weight_N.htm
).
Again, this is stating the obvious for any single guy or gal who's watched misery and widening waistlines begin to make their mark on newly married couples after about 2 years. Marriage not only makes people miserable, it will probably shorten your life if you're born after 1970.
I've found marriage to be the only real mistake I've made in my life, and the data supports that. Fortunately with the rise of Web 2.0 and social networking, guys are more able now to get educated about what marriage means for men in the U.S., and consequently there's talk of a "marriage strike" by young men since the early 90s. Which makes sense.
Anyway, modern data indicates men are happier if they never marry, and just stay in committed but unmarried relationships. I think women ultimately will be better off too:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/women-are-happiest-with-first-love-and-men-with-serial-monogamy-study-finds-577451.html
"Men are happiest when they are "serial monogamists" - having a succession of faithful relationships but never getting married, a study published today shows."
Guys, you owe it to yourself to check out http://www.dont-marry.com/
Whatever happens, don't get married. Ever. It's just fsckin misery after a couple years, at best.
California can and should go its own way. California would be a rockin' country, with all of the good things (high tech and babes) and none of the bad stuff (rust belts and religion).
Heck, the California flag already says "California Republic". Make it so!
I agree it would be great to be able to mine key resources from the moon. But quite honestly, I think we're all overlooking the root problem of our time, overpopulation. It will take fuel to get to the moon and back, fuel that could be used for any one of a thousand other pressing terrestrial needs here, and I imagine that will be a hard sell. Don't get me wrong, I like your idea, but I think lunar mining (and much else we talk about on/.) will make the most sense if human population is stable, not ever-growing. I'd prefer a scenario of "stable Earth population, with ever growing material well being" vs. 'ever growing Earth population, desperately trying to find more resources". I recall one calculation indicating that at current growth rates, the mass of all humanity would exceed the mass of the universe in about 7000 years. Obviously that won't happen. But it does throw into stark relief, sooner or later, preferably sooner, we're going to have to figure out our overpopulation problem.
democracy made a lot of sense for a long time, but societies today are just too large and complex for ordinary people to understand. Problems such as what approach to take to fusion research have to be reduced to some sort of emotional slogan that resonates with people who know nothing about the matter at hand.
Democracy may be outliving its usefulness. I'm guessing technocracy is the logical successor.
Slashdot Mirror
Bashing men is the new normal. A good read for any young man (or young woman for that matter) is this one: http://www.martynemko.com/articles/men-as-beasts-burden_id1228
this is cool. You know, most of the rest of the ChristianWalmartMicrosft States of America can't stand this stuff. And that's fine. I hope California can just gracefully say adios to the other 49, best wishes, etc. Kind of like how Singapore parted ways with Malaysia when they realized Singapore was doing all the heavy lifting there.
I'm guilty of both. But honestly, two institutions that are failing millions and are now thankfully crumbling are "college" and "marriage". The two most overrated aspects of American life, and both cause lots of remorse and compromised lives. What will happen next is good, and healthy: the dull institutions will crumble, while their mission will live on in some new way. *Learning* is good, I suspect we'll see lifelong learning replace 4 years and a sheepskin.
Business people are not as bright as IT people who are not as bright as scientists and doctors. Don't believe me? Google back for the vitriol toward techies that came out of Wall Street in the months prior to Google's IPO, when Google was adamant that fairness prevail in the allocation of IPO shares. Lots of red-faced thundering from the suits about these upstart tech weenies... it's kind of funny now, how confident the suits were the GOOG would fail because "they're all engineers, no business skills."
That's just nuts. I don't understand the rationale for that at all, in this day and age.
Marriage is the worst thing that can happen to you. Worse than a car accident, in most cases.
Tate is now a RoR fan, but his take on good Java coding is a nice read. The book itself won't tell you how to code Java syntax, but it really underscored a lot of things I'd learned myself. In brief, whatever you do with Java or other languages, listen to your instincts when vendors and "architects" start pushing high falutin', sea-going, top heavy "solutions" on you. Yes, IBM, I'm talking to YOU. In fairness some architects are OK guys. But watch out for the ones that make simple problems complicated. Complexity should come from the business problem you are solving, not from wrestling with a framework to retrieve a string from a database ;P
www.nomarriage.com is another good one as a primer. I can't speak to the web design of either site. But the information on both is pretty good, and very, very relevant for young men today. There's one other, just an article, that's also quite good with a different spin but similar conclusions: http://www.martynemko.com/articles/gold-diggers-are-alive-and-well-in-2006_id1222 Get thee educated on these realities, my friend.
www.dont-marry.com
Marriage is the most overrated part of the American way of life. Trust me, you don't want to become another married loser in the 'burbs.
http://www.martynemko.com/articles/men-as-beasts-burden_id1228
This should be required reading for anyone showing up at a courthouse to sign a marriage contract: http://www.martynemko.com/articles/men-as-beasts-burden_id1228
SlashDot is up to almost a million for uid. Statistically, there's got to be at least 10 user's that are/were married at some point in their lives. Hell, I'll go out on a limb and say 15.
God, what I would give to turn back the clock. Do not get married guys. Talk to a good sampling of men in their 40s and 50s to get real wisdom on life and marriage. MARRIAGE ABSOLUTELY SUCKS. Without exaggeration, I can say that marriage is the single worst volitional act that a man can make in the U.S. today. I mean, you can enlist and decide it was a bad idea, but then you can just not re-enlist. With marriage and divorce law, there is NO WAY TO REALLY UNDO A MARRIAGE. It's like losing your legs in a car accident. You can adapt as best you can, but you cannot reclaim what you have lost.
Dude, marriage is misery. It is the single most important FINANCIAL decision you will ever make. For your own sanity, be sure you have researched the pros and cons of the legal corporation that you are looking to sign onto.
Mortality rates for married vs. single are based on people born in the 1930s or even 1920s. For those age cohorts, only the very sickly or very ugly did not get married, it was standard issue social behavior for their time. Correlation != causation, as always. Being married did not make people healthy, it was the other way around. Now, look at people today and it's obvious to a casual observer that a whole different dynamic is at work. The data backs it up: not only are the people who stay single happier ( http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/women-are-happiest-with-first-love-and-men-with-serial-monogamy-study-finds-577451.html ) but they don't get as fat as married people (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-10-22-marriage-weight_N.htm ). Again, this is stating the obvious for any single guy or gal who's watched misery and widening waistlines begin to make their mark on newly married couples after about 2 years. Marriage not only makes people miserable, it will probably shorten your life if you're born after 1970.
I've found marriage to be the only real mistake I've made in my life, and the data supports that. Fortunately with the rise of Web 2.0 and social networking, guys are more able now to get educated about what marriage means for men in the U.S., and consequently there's talk of a "marriage strike" by young men since the early 90s. Which makes sense. Anyway, modern data indicates men are happier if they never marry, and just stay in committed but unmarried relationships. I think women ultimately will be better off too: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/women-are-happiest-with-first-love-and-men-with-serial-monogamy-study-finds-577451.html "Men are happiest when they are "serial monogamists" - having a succession of faithful relationships but never getting married, a study published today shows."
Guys, you owe it to yourself to check out http://www.dont-marry.com/ Whatever happens, don't get married. Ever. It's just fsckin misery after a couple years, at best.
Wife, kids, mortgage, trapped...well, you should have checked out http://dont-marry.com/
California can and should go its own way. California would be a rockin' country, with all of the good things (high tech and babes) and none of the bad stuff (rust belts and religion). Heck, the California flag already says "California Republic". Make it so!
I agree it would be great to be able to mine key resources from the moon. But quite honestly, I think we're all overlooking the root problem of our time, overpopulation. It will take fuel to get to the moon and back, fuel that could be used for any one of a thousand other pressing terrestrial needs here, and I imagine that will be a hard sell. Don't get me wrong, I like your idea, but I think lunar mining (and much else we talk about on /.) will make the most sense if human population is stable, not ever-growing. I'd prefer a scenario of "stable Earth population, with ever growing material well being" vs. 'ever growing Earth population, desperately trying to find more resources". I recall one calculation indicating that at current growth rates, the mass of all humanity would exceed the mass of the universe in about 7000 years. Obviously that won't happen. But it does throw into stark relief, sooner or later, preferably sooner, we're going to have to figure out our overpopulation problem.
democracy made a lot of sense for a long time, but societies today are just too large and complex for ordinary people to understand. Problems such as what approach to take to fusion research have to be reduced to some sort of emotional slogan that resonates with people who know nothing about the matter at hand. Democracy may be outliving its usefulness. I'm guessing technocracy is the logical successor.
He can't be wrong. He has an MBA!
We're screwed
gg