You know. I skimmed that page and a major complaint was PHP's inconsistent function parameters as well as its large number of similar function calls. I've done a lot of work using Perl and a lot of work using PHP, and the one constant I found with Perl was there are generally 10 ways to code a particular algorithm in which 9 of them are generally unreadable by novice Perl programmers. Some of those most confusing code I've ever seen was in Perl code.
Perl is semantically complex, which I find is far worse than PHP's function library. Perl is generally a time drain for me when it comes to debugging semantical errors, whereas ~95% of the bugs I write in PHP are syntax bugs that get reported by the PHP compiler. PHP is simply effortless for me. That's why I use it for CGI scripting and not Perl.
I will use Perl for data file processing tasks though.
...free (as in beer) software. It's a matter of people creating a product to sell or give away for free. The same arguments that apply to proprietary software versus free software applies here. Obviously, if people spend time reading free blogs and online-zine articles, they will reduce time spent on reading newspapers, magazines, and books. The number of hours in a day are fixed. That's a negative aspect, but I believe it's one of the few negatives. (Publication of wrong, unvetted information would be the other negative).
I believe time is the primary resource that's in competition, not subject matter. Many blogs, message board posts, and websites I read are much more narrowly focused than print media, so competition for subject matter seems limited. Narrowly focused topics are a good thing. If it were not for the Internet, I simply would have no outlet for what I write about, because my stuff is unpublishable due to the nature of the content. In the print world, that would be bad for me and those who read my blog.
There is a societal benefit to free information and the online publication infrastructure. More people writing means more people learning to communicate, which makes more effective workers. It also means audience reach is farther compared to print publishing, so there will be more people sympathetic to your issues. On my blog, I regularly see readers coming from China, India, Russia, Iran, and Australia. If I were publish a magazine column, my readers would only be Americans. It's easy to convince those culturally similar to me, but it's satisfying to know I may be convincing those very different from me.
This concept that articles and fiction pieces have to be brief, power-packed, and trendy strikes me as a cop out. People eat up message board threads consisting of nearly 500 words each and 20 messages deep. A thread can easily reach 10,000 words of material, so I don't buy the short attention span argument.
What I buy into is that people are simply uninterested in your work if you believe you need to be brief and trendy. If someone buys a $25 hard cover book, they have an investment in the book for which they need to recoup by reading it from beginning to end, so they may put up with a book that's less than thrilling. They have no investment with your free online piece, so they're going to be far more sensitive deciding if your content is interesting and thus worthy of further reading.
People like interactivity. How many times have you read a newspaper article and disagreed with a critical point? You had no means providing feedback, other than "letters to the editor", which was up to the whim of an editor to publish or not. The Internet provides the ultimate channel for feedback.
Better to set up a system to pick a random sampling of people from all over and MAKE them serve...That should keep the majority from having any desire to be there at all.
...because it works so well for jury duty. By the way, Spector still walks free.
It's not the kernel devs' job to explain the POSIX spec. It is the downstream admins' job to check the spec of the system they're administrating.
Oh yes... every admin reads a spec for developers. By the way, chroot is not POSIX.
opengroup.org
The following features, marked legacy or obsolescent in the base documents, are not carried forward into IEEE Std 1003.1-2001. Other features from the base documents marked legacy or obsolescent are carried forward unless otherwise noted.
From XSH5, the following legacy interfaces, headers, and external variables are not carried forward:
This definition permits the operation of chroot(), even though that function is not in POSIX.1; see also File Hierarchy.
I bothered to check.
The correct word would have been ignorant
on
When Not to Use chroot
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Not incompetent. You can't blame admins who haven't been instructed properly, but you can certainly blame kernel developers who haven't clearly communicated what their tools are to be used for. Adrian ought to spend his time educating not insulting.
I'm rather weary of the "I have a bigger pen^H^H^H brain than you do" bullshit that goes on in IT.
China, much like Iran, does not have any of the sexual deviancy associated with the United States and the rest of the West. Therefore, no transgendered players exist.
By the way, transgender is gender orientation, not sexual orientation. You are ill-informed.
China, much like Iran, does not have any of the sexual deviancy associated with the United States and the rest of the West. Therefore, no transgendered players exist.
In FPS games I generally choose female characters because they have a smaller visual profile so they're slightly harder to see. Some games will have a skinny alien so I'll often take that. Other times I'll choose a character that blends in with the background of the map. Sometimes I'll switch character models several times in one map.
I think most women would feel unnerved by it. You can't tell if the site admin is a pervy guy who will screenshot you and post your pic on his creepy personal website.
...choose an ugly avatar? And pretty people a pretty avatar? Because, I've noticed there's usually a huge disparity between the two. How about obese for obese? Super-obese for super-obese?
My first impression was the site was one of those fake sites with no original content other than keyword ads. The tabular list of category keywords is always a cue for that. And, the yellow banner image looks exactly like a typical banner ad so I completely ignored it at first, which I doubt is intended because it's actually content.
The design of the site is extremely lacking. I doubt it required more than 20 minutes work. It's hard to take a site seriously when they're unwilling to spend any real time on presentation.
I don't think the web model works well for frequent data entry or data manipulation tasks. Before I finished college, I worked a few various jobs requiring data entry so I can appreciate how effortless a good curses or DOS application can be. That's because those applications were designed for maximum workflow efficiency from the start. Their focus was not glitzy design but boring data organization and being smart about filtering options to the context of the task.
There's nothing wrong with glitzy design because it has a purpose when it's used properly. If your client base is composed of infrequent users, then good web design will naturally guide them to understand the data organization. But in terms of workflow, the glitz gets in the way. Consider that a web page might place a form in a tab that slides out when you mouse over. When you mouse out, it slides back to hide. This helps hide a complex feature from the overall design so users can understand what high level functions are available, such as edit my details or shop for product XYZ. That sort of feature would only hinder an experienced data entry worker who has years of experience with the business and the system. A data entry person will usually be more efficient when the data is presented in tabular grid (boring) with no IO pauses or animated transitions to get in the way.
The other thing I'd consider is a curses application is like a desktop application when it comes to data access and session state. Converting a desktop application to an AJAX/web application is certainly not as straightforward as executive management would like to think. Even with pulling data down into the browser, there are still issues of managing delay and not having a direct connection to the database. For example, a CGI based application never knows if the user will be back or commit their changes, but a curses or desktop application generally maintains a continuous socket connection so it can perform more intricate operations such as lock a record while it's being manipulated by the user. Do that in a web form and you can end up in trouble.
Desktop apps are usually more complex and difficult to build but can be worth it for complex DB interaction. An AJAX web application bears the complexity of a thick desktop client, but not the power. An AJAX app will always be a 3-tiered system at minimum. More tiers, more complexity. I think AJAX excels in data preview not data entry or manipulation.
The managers and developers designing that new system simply never considered how the workflow of the user would be benefited. It sounded like they were only concerned about upgrading the technology, so they treated it more important than workflow and ended up changing the core design with the unintended side-effects of that technology. Had I been present in those meetings, my first questions would have been: what does it fix, why is it needed, and why would that be better?
I'm not convinced an AJAX web app is futile in this case, but implementing one without understanding what makes a data entry worker efficient is just plain ignorance.
Look at the playdough type substance holding the wires down. That and the wires make it look very suspicious. What a stupid girl. Tsk. Tsk. Tsk. I don't understand how smart people can lack so much common sense.
By the way, a great way to hide a real bomb would be to hide it as tech art or some sort of wearable attachment, so I don't buy this "they should know a real terrorist wouldn't put it on the outside" baloney.
I read an earlier post saying it was "just a breadboard".... yea, yea, yea. Ma and Pa flying in from Utah would know that. Mmmmm'kay.
I'm not sure you understand... it was the same person who submitted the work. With this specific example, societal or educational advantages were not part of the equation. The single variable that changed was the gender of the name. That's it. Nothing else. One got accepted. One didn't. Same work, same person, same academic background, but different gender.
I don't think a good research work will be dumped because it has a woman's name on it
Obviously it does. I've seen these submission stories before but in the book industry. Female authors often assume male pen names because male names sell better. Why do you think J.K. Rowling goes by J.K.? It wasn't by accident.
It would be nice to have some examples of this so-called stupid behavior.
I know developers who've said out loud "women can't code", "women don't have a logical mind for IT", and "women can't write a decent algorithm". I also worked with a couple guys with whom I believe felt hatred toward certain attractive women in the company. I think it was because they felt rejected because those women were uninterested in them.
The environment depends on a few things; the number of women in important roles, the tone set by management, and the tolerance and acceptance level of the men, which seems to depend on previous work experience with women.
I work as a software developer, and being male I am the minority. We have 3 men and 7 women on my team, and none of us act stupid. I would say most teams here have at least 50% women.
What you describe is a unique work environment. You should understand it's not typical and that you are better off for it.
I get discriminated against by stupid, pretty female culture a LOT more than women get discriminated against by stupid male geek culture. I am willing to be that most geeks feel the same way.
As a self-professed "hottie", I have to admit, you are right to feel there is discrimination from pretty people to ugly people. It's mostly in casual settings, friend settings, or fashion oriented settings such as high school, college, parties, clubs, or anything fashion industry related. (You did mention fashionista so I assume that's what you meant). You are right to feel cheated as that sort of discrimination is wrong or at the very least slimy. Pretty people discriminate quite frequently and it's rather cruel at times. I've done it myself, but I must say I rarely do it at all these days.
However, what concerns me is whether or not you guys are aware of the difference between real discrimination versus rejection of your romantic advances. A woman has the right to reject any man who makes a move on her, regardless of what she looks like and regardless of what he looks like. If she's picky and highly selective, that's her prerogative and her choice to make, just as you have the right to choose to reject a woman you're uninterested in.
Its the pretty people that face the obstacles. But those are the same obstacles us pasty geeks (male and female) with no fashion sense run into when we try to get jobs that favour the beautiful people.
To be honest, I don't think that applies to men in IT. I believe handsome men in IT have a slight advantage over less-than-handsome men. But, I think you are dead on when it comes to women. I believe pretty women are at a disadvantage over less-than-pretty women who act like guys.
I only have my work experience to go by so I know the handsome IT guys did pretty well in my company. I honestly don't believe it was a huge factor though, probably only a small edge because the company was so desperate just to find "someone" decent to fill the job.
....and transitioning from male to female in the IT industry, I know what Tim's talking about. It's true. Women are treated differently in IT. It's only a big surprise to male IT workers.
One academic went through a sex change, submitted the same papers under both identities, and found that papers were accepted from a man but were rejected when they came from a woman, said the web inventor.
I believe what you know is a lessor factor in the overall picture of your peers' rating of your qualifications or abilities. I've come to think of it as a rating system that managers and co-workers unconsciously use when forming an opinion about you. The rating system merges a set of attributes, which are sorted from high to low, that produce a value between great, good, average, mediocre, and poor. Here are some of the attributes I can think of.
You are male
You are aggressive and proactive
You speak loudly, clearly, and fluently
You speak and offer your suggestions without prompting
You bring a previously unmentioned idea or approach to the conversation
You only need to be told something once
Your last project was successful
You are unwavering in your opinion or suggestion
You can recover from mistakes gracefully and tactfully
You are not a whipping boy
You have previous work credentials
You have academic credentials
The more of those attributes you have and the more that are lower numbers, the higher your perceived value is going to be.
I "think" you can only sue the lender who placed the invalid information on your report. I know if you alert the lender and make them aware it's an error (and it really is) and then they refuse to do anything about it, you can apply for credit, get denied to show damage, and then sue the hell out of the lender.
Slashdot Mirror
Perl is semantically complex, which I find is far worse than PHP's function library. Perl is generally a time drain for me when it comes to debugging semantical errors, whereas ~95% of the bugs I write in PHP are syntax bugs that get reported by the PHP compiler. PHP is simply effortless for me. That's why I use it for CGI scripting and not Perl.
I will use Perl for data file processing tasks though.
...free (as in beer) software. It's a matter of people creating a product to sell or give away for free. The same arguments that apply to proprietary software versus free software applies here. Obviously, if people spend time reading free blogs and online-zine articles, they will reduce time spent on reading newspapers, magazines, and books. The number of hours in a day are fixed. That's a negative aspect, but I believe it's one of the few negatives. (Publication of wrong, unvetted information would be the other negative).
I believe time is the primary resource that's in competition, not subject matter. Many blogs, message board posts, and websites I read are much more narrowly focused than print media, so competition for subject matter seems limited. Narrowly focused topics are a good thing. If it were not for the Internet, I simply would have no outlet for what I write about, because my stuff is unpublishable due to the nature of the content. In the print world, that would be bad for me and those who read my blog.
There is a societal benefit to free information and the online publication infrastructure. More people writing means more people learning to communicate, which makes more effective workers. It also means audience reach is farther compared to print publishing, so there will be more people sympathetic to your issues. On my blog, I regularly see readers coming from China, India, Russia, Iran, and Australia. If I were publish a magazine column, my readers would only be Americans. It's easy to convince those culturally similar to me, but it's satisfying to know I may be convincing those very different from me.
This concept that articles and fiction pieces have to be brief, power-packed, and trendy strikes me as a cop out. People eat up message board threads consisting of nearly 500 words each and 20 messages deep. A thread can easily reach 10,000 words of material, so I don't buy the short attention span argument.
What I buy into is that people are simply uninterested in your work if you believe you need to be brief and trendy. If someone buys a $25 hard cover book, they have an investment in the book for which they need to recoup by reading it from beginning to end, so they may put up with a book that's less than thrilling. They have no investment with your free online piece, so they're going to be far more sensitive deciding if your content is interesting and thus worthy of further reading.
People like interactivity. How many times have you read a newspaper article and disagreed with a critical point? You had no means providing feedback, other than "letters to the editor", which was up to the whim of an editor to publish or not. The Internet provides the ultimate channel for feedback.
Baba Booey!
opengroup.org -- I bothered to check.
Not incompetent. You can't blame admins who haven't been instructed properly, but you can certainly blame kernel developers who haven't clearly communicated what their tools are to be used for. Adrian ought to spend his time educating not insulting.
I'm rather weary of the "I have a bigger pen^H^H^H brain than you do" bullshit that goes on in IT.
OK.. Chris Cracker. By the way, can I borrow your eye liner?
In FPS games I generally choose female characters because they have a smaller visual profile so they're slightly harder to see. Some games will have a skinny alien so I'll often take that. Other times I'll choose a character that blends in with the background of the map. Sometimes I'll switch character models several times in one map.
...choose an ugly avatar? And pretty people a pretty avatar? Because, I've noticed there's usually a huge disparity between the two. How about obese for obese? Super-obese for super-obese?
The point is to escape a crappy reality.
The design of the site is extremely lacking. I doubt it required more than 20 minutes work. It's hard to take a site seriously when they're unwilling to spend any real time on presentation.
There can be more than 1 reason for bias. Profit (i.e. sales) is only 1 reason, not the only reason.
I don't think the web model works well for frequent data entry or data manipulation tasks. Before I finished college, I worked a few various jobs requiring data entry so I can appreciate how effortless a good curses or DOS application can be. That's because those applications were designed for maximum workflow efficiency from the start. Their focus was not glitzy design but boring data organization and being smart about filtering options to the context of the task.
There's nothing wrong with glitzy design because it has a purpose when it's used properly. If your client base is composed of infrequent users, then good web design will naturally guide them to understand the data organization. But in terms of workflow, the glitz gets in the way. Consider that a web page might place a form in a tab that slides out when you mouse over. When you mouse out, it slides back to hide. This helps hide a complex feature from the overall design so users can understand what high level functions are available, such as edit my details or shop for product XYZ. That sort of feature would only hinder an experienced data entry worker who has years of experience with the business and the system. A data entry person will usually be more efficient when the data is presented in tabular grid (boring) with no IO pauses or animated transitions to get in the way.
The other thing I'd consider is a curses application is like a desktop application when it comes to data access and session state. Converting a desktop application to an AJAX/web application is certainly not as straightforward as executive management would like to think. Even with pulling data down into the browser, there are still issues of managing delay and not having a direct connection to the database. For example, a CGI based application never knows if the user will be back or commit their changes, but a curses or desktop application generally maintains a continuous socket connection so it can perform more intricate operations such as lock a record while it's being manipulated by the user. Do that in a web form and you can end up in trouble.
Desktop apps are usually more complex and difficult to build but can be worth it for complex DB interaction. An AJAX web application bears the complexity of a thick desktop client, but not the power. An AJAX app will always be a 3-tiered system at minimum. More tiers, more complexity. I think AJAX excels in data preview not data entry or manipulation.
The managers and developers designing that new system simply never considered how the workflow of the user would be benefited. It sounded like they were only concerned about upgrading the technology, so they treated it more important than workflow and ended up changing the core design with the unintended side-effects of that technology. Had I been present in those meetings, my first questions would have been: what does it fix, why is it needed, and why would that be better?
I'm not convinced an AJAX web app is futile in this case, but implementing one without understanding what makes a data entry worker efficient is just plain ignorance.
Bunch of wannabes (except for those of you who are real lawyers, hehe).
I shoulda went into law. $igh. Is 35 too old to start skewl again? Nevermind.
pic
Look at the playdough type substance holding the wires down. That and the wires make it look very suspicious. What a stupid girl. Tsk. Tsk. Tsk. I don't understand how smart people can lack so much common sense.
By the way, a great way to hide a real bomb would be to hide it as tech art or some sort of wearable attachment, so I don't buy this "they should know a real terrorist wouldn't put it on the outside" baloney.
I read an earlier post saying it was "just a breadboard".... yea, yea, yea. Ma and Pa flying in from Utah would know that. Mmmmm'kay.
Obviously it does. I've seen these submission stories before but in the book industry. Female authors often assume male pen names because male names sell better. Why do you think J.K. Rowling goes by J.K.? It wasn't by accident.
The environment depends on a few things; the number of women in important roles, the tone set by management, and the tolerance and acceptance level of the men, which seems to depend on previous work experience with women.
What you describe is a unique work environment. You should understand it's not typical and that you are better off for it.
However, what concerns me is whether or not you guys are aware of the difference between real discrimination versus rejection of your romantic advances. A woman has the right to reject any man who makes a move on her, regardless of what she looks like and regardless of what he looks like. If she's picky and highly selective, that's her prerogative and her choice to make, just as you have the right to choose to reject a woman you're uninterested in.
I only have my work experience to go by so I know the handsome IT guys did pretty well in my company. I honestly don't believe it was a huge factor though, probably only a small edge because the company was so desperate just to find "someone" decent to fill the job.
- You are male
- You are aggressive and proactive
- You speak loudly, clearly, and fluently
- You speak and offer your suggestions without prompting
- You bring a previously unmentioned idea or approach to the conversation
- You only need to be told something once
- Your last project was successful
- You are unwavering in your opinion or suggestion
- You can recover from mistakes gracefully and tactfully
- You are not a whipping boy
- You have previous work credentials
- You have academic credentials
The more of those attributes you have and the more that are lower numbers, the higher your perceived value is going to be.I "think" you can only sue the lender who placed the invalid information on your report. I know if you alert the lender and make them aware it's an error (and it really is) and then they refuse to do anything about it, you can apply for credit, get denied to show damage, and then sue the hell out of the lender.
WOW. Now I KNOW you're a member of a privileged society and that you're a nut job. I didn't know that before, but now I do. LOL
:D
You read an awful lot into other people's words. Heh. By the way, explaining how things are is never whining. FYI.