That's not what I said, what I said was that currently there's a gold rush in that there are more jobs than programmers, and so programmers are getting vastly overpaid for their work. When the situation stablises, the inflated wages being paid out will drop to a reasonable rate.
When will this happen? I can't see this happening all that soon. The need for programmers is only going to go up, and yet (in this country, at least), the desire towards such a career is nowhere close to matching that.
And I suppose you'd be in favor of reading aloud the latest Windows additions to bugtraq at a Microsoft shareholders meeting?
Seriously, Bugtraq is not a good point to bring up at the moment. The amount of security bugs on the Linux side has outweighed those on the Windows side for some time now.
Some people are disabled. Some people have limited capability displays. Some people actually run into web pages that look too bad since their browser window is too large (like me, I usually run my browser in the full 1280x1024)
The commercialization of the web has spoken (in as much as an action can speak...) The verdict is: those people don't matter. They have a very small market share and thus, unless they start suing or gaining a lot of simpathy with most people, they don't exist as far as most of the big flashy corporate (especially dot-com) websites go.
The purpose of a high school is to help prepare a student for *life*, not just a job. Social activities are part of that learning, just like academics are.
I'd have to say they do an incredibly shitty job at that. I'm not sure of any "learning" institution which more inacurrately portrays adult life. High school is NOT the place to learn how to get around in life.
A local editorialist wrote (in his article "lunatic mumblings keep me out of office"): "If nominated, I will not run. If elected, I will not serve. If forced to serve, I will pout."
case in point: why do you think action movies and other such forms of visual stimuli are more popular than "chich flicks" or anything cerebral?
I'd say in my case, action films are actually interesting, exciting, and often get the adrenaline flowing. "Chick flicks," on the other hand, are almost always whiny, self-indulgent, and celebrate the awful painful way people in our society seem to like to go through relationships. Since I'm a relatively cynical person, I tend to reject the cheap ploys to "tug at the heartstrings" so often as well. If I'm going to see a movie with idiots making poor personal decisions, it might as well have some interesting action in it as well.
As for cerebral pictures, I'd have to agree with you there, I like an interesting one as well.
Hate to tell you this, but colleges HATE people that stand out, cause a fuss, etc. Colleges have the popular appearance of being liberal, but when it comes to the administration, they are extremely conservative. There aren't going to be too many admissions boards who will be too thrilled with "standing up to the system." At best, they won't care.
When I said good company, I meant they came out with a good product that everyone liked and that no one really had any problems using. I thought
everything up through Netscape 3.x was golden...
THEN they did what you said. And on top of that, their next product (Communicator 4.x) was such utter crap that I can't believe I used it for so long.
Hrm. I thought everything up through 1.1N was golden. 3.0 was a disaster. I actually consider 4.x to be an -improvement- in stability, but not by much.
I didn't do any moderation on this thread, but I think starting the article with "you dumb bitch" is as close as you can get to either flamebait or troll. (more likely troll, I would think).
The problem with the "fingerprints on the gun" analogy is that it's not that easy to tell if the fingerprints were on the gun before or after the crime, only that they were there. With poking a machine, it is VERY easy to tell if it happened before or after the machine was cracked. He's not contaminating anything, that implies that he's somehow erasing, invalidating, or obscuring earlier information, and that would require his packets to be traveling back in time.
If I drop a feather from a dove and a piece of lead which is shaped like a feather, which do you think will hit the ground first? Hint: it won't be at the same time, unless you're dropping them in a vacuum. Air resistance can screw up the speed at which objects fall, relative to their weight. True, that was more of an extreme example than the woman vs the woman with the suit on, but the point is made.
Look, another person who wants to claim that anti-abortion supporters are not religiously motivated. Ha haha ha hahahahah!
I'm about as unreligious as you get, and I sortof flop back and forth on the issue. The religious community is against it because they see abortion as murder, and murder being wrong. But guess what? They're hardly alone in that!
The right to choose is a women's choice. Stop trying to take it away from her. Get your hands off my body.
Blah blah blah HANDS OFF MY BODY! blah blah blah. This is the problem. The issue here is whether a woman should be allowed to kill her unborn child or not. There are a fair number of rational arguments for and against, yet every time someone tries to rationally discuss this, some abortion rights "protester" starts foaming at the mouth and screaming "GET YOUR FUCKING HANDS OFF MY BODY!" Just like the anti-abortion protesters will scream "BABY KILLERS!!" The anti-abortion side gets misty eyed and starts whining, "But.. the children!" while the pro-abortion side tries to pretend it's not about death but about "choice," trying to distract from the real issues at work. Let's admit it, both sides are equally good as producing zealots, and to pretend that the pro-abortion side isn't full of that kind as well as the anti-abortion side is rediculous. Abortion is one of those topics where almost no one wants to be sane and where the volume of the voice is more important than the arguement.
(Saying that abortion is a religious issues is no indication of a belief that religion pervades all. Denying that abortion is a religious issue is naive.)
The Bible says "Thou shalt not kill" as well. Does that mean that everyone in favor of keeping murder illegal (and I'm not talking abortion either) is religiously motivated?
Notice the attribution of that last comment - the MPAA! It appears that the MPAA is speaking for Linux users!
Did this come as any surprise? Did you really expect them to say "screw all those Linux users forever!!!!" It's called public relations, and large corporations (and larger organizations like the MPAA) are very good at it. They are more than capable of offering olive branches, especially if it doesn't hurt their business model. Offering commercial Linux players helps their business model, since that diffuses one of the thornier issues (or it was thorny until rejected above). The MPAA is always willing to let you back into the fold if you pay the fee (CCA licensing fees passed on to consumers) they ask for.
Hrm. I do remember seeing a feature on Slashdot some time ago where people had the idea of getting Playstation 2's from Japan, but then Japan started banning their export. Did that ever hold up?
Slashdot Mirror
When will this happen? I can't see this happening all that soon. The need for programmers is only going to go up, and yet (in this country, at least), the desire towards such a career is nowhere close to matching that.
Brachiosaurs are actually a good deal taller than the broto, and have that bizzare nostril situation.
You know, I've seen Netscape for Linux take out X several times..
Seriously, Bugtraq is not a good point to bring up at the moment. The amount of security bugs on the Linux side has outweighed those on the Windows side for some time now.
The commercialization of the web has spoken (in as much as an action can speak...) The verdict is: those people don't matter. They have a very small market share and thus, unless they start suing or gaining a lot of simpathy with most people, they don't exist as far as most of the big flashy corporate (especially dot-com) websites go.
Incorrect. If you're going to rant on grammar, you should at least get all the facts right. :>
I'd have to say they do an incredibly shitty job at that. I'm not sure of any "learning" institution which more inacurrately portrays adult life. High school is NOT the place to learn how to get around in life.
I'd say in my case, action films are actually interesting, exciting, and often get the adrenaline flowing. "Chick flicks," on the other hand, are almost always whiny, self-indulgent, and celebrate the awful painful way people in our society seem to like to go through relationships. Since I'm a relatively cynical person, I tend to reject the cheap ploys to "tug at the heartstrings" so often as well. If I'm going to see a movie with idiots making poor personal decisions, it might as well have some interesting action in it as well.
As for cerebral pictures, I'd have to agree with you there, I like an interesting one as well.
Hate to tell you this, but colleges HATE people that stand out, cause a fuss, etc. Colleges have the popular appearance of being liberal, but when it comes to the administration, they are extremely conservative. There aren't going to be too many admissions boards who will be too thrilled with "standing up to the system." At best, they won't care.
THEN they did what you said. And on top of that, their next product (Communicator 4.x) was such utter crap that I can't believe I used it for so long.
Hrm. I thought everything up through 1.1N was golden. 3.0 was a disaster. I actually consider 4.x to be an -improvement- in stability, but not by much.
Hmmm, sounds like he got what he deserved.
I'm about as unreligious as you get, and I sortof flop back and forth on the issue. The religious community is against it because they see abortion as murder, and murder being wrong. But guess what? They're hardly alone in that!
The right to choose is a women's choice. Stop trying to take it away from her. Get your hands off my body.
Blah blah blah HANDS OFF MY BODY! blah blah blah. This is the problem. The issue here is whether a woman should be allowed to kill her unborn child or not. There are a fair number of rational arguments for and against, yet every time someone tries to rationally discuss this, some abortion rights "protester" starts foaming at the mouth and screaming "GET YOUR FUCKING HANDS OFF MY BODY!" Just like the anti-abortion protesters will scream "BABY KILLERS!!" The anti-abortion side gets misty eyed and starts whining, "But.. the children!" while the pro-abortion side tries to pretend it's not about death but about "choice," trying to distract from the real issues at work. Let's admit it, both sides are equally good as producing zealots, and to pretend that the pro-abortion side isn't full of that kind as well as the anti-abortion side is rediculous. Abortion is one of those topics where almost no one wants to be sane and where the volume of the voice is more important than the arguement.
The Bible says "Thou shalt not kill" as well. Does that mean that everyone in favor of keeping murder illegal (and I'm not talking abortion either) is religiously motivated?
Did this come as any surprise? Did you really expect them to say "screw all those Linux users forever!!!!" It's called public relations, and large corporations (and larger organizations like the MPAA) are very good at it. They are more than capable of offering olive branches, especially if it doesn't hurt their business model. Offering commercial Linux players helps their business model, since that diffuses one of the thornier issues (or it was thorny until rejected above). The MPAA is always willing to let you back into the fold if you pay the fee (CCA licensing fees passed on to consumers) they ask for.