When will the Americans realize that they no longer have any time to waste ?
When it becomes politically acceptable to criticize and act against underperforming administrators, teachers, parents, students, and cultures. Right now, the only allowable form of criticism is against people who say there is enough funding, even though tripling funding in the past 30ish years has not improved results.
I worked with a guy who was really good, top notch. He didn't realize it until he asked me to review his resume that he was coming off incredibly arrogantly in his resume. By toning it down, he had a lot of success - ended up getting some excellent offers well outside his language expertise (from C to Java). Maybe try that? I wouldn't pad. Part of my ease with this is that I'm not a 10/10 guy, maybe a 6/10 or 7/10 coder on a good day, and it doesn't intimidate people.
13 years out of college and you can't get hired? Do you have a professional network of people who have a positive opinion of you and will refer you directly to hiring managers? If so, why not use that avenue? If not, are you sure your self-appraisal is accurate?
It also assumes all you do is code. I'm not just a developer, but a software engineer, which means I oversee environment management, architecture/design, code and configuration management, perform code reviews, support existing products, train other engineers, etc., so while there might be a day or two each year I write 200 or maybe even 300 lines of code, that is extremely rare. Generally I'm happy with 10-20, which fits with what a good supervisor of mine once said that 600 lines per month is a really good rate for reliable code.
Most programmers fall into the average range. Some are better, some worse. Remarkable.
40? Whatever. Lots of people in their 40s and 50s and 60s have mediocre jobs writing 200 lines of code per quarter in some large corporation. My team of ten has only two programmers under 40, and just barely (38 and 39).
Just dig in and apply for jobs until you get one. Work as hard as you can at being good at your job.
The original question was whether "you think an abortion, especially during the late term, is killing a human being?"
Whether it *matters to you* if a fetus is a human being isn't the question. It's whether you *think it is* a human being.
Since you continue to avoid answering that question despite multiple independent attempts to get a straight answer out of you, you further reinforce my statement above "I often find that few who are broadly in favor of abortion rights as a form of birth control want to address the specifics of whether a fetus is a human being."
My personal opinion on why that tends to be true is that it takes the argument into a place of moral ambiguity, which interferes with what Glenn Greenwald so brilliantly calls the "desired self-perception" of the person uncomfortable with the ambiguity.
Strange that you don't think the question matters, since you took the trouble to respond. If you didn't think the question mattered, you wouldn't have responded in the first place. Perhaps there is more to it?
Right or wrong, I often find that few who are broadly in favor of abortion rights as a form of birth control want to address the specifics of whether a fetus is a human being.
I had occasion to go to a NASCAR event, and I was surrounded by lots of poor white people (and a smattering of other types) with bad body odor. I wasn't sure if it was just a bad day, and so I went again the next year. Still didn't enjoy it, still hated the smell of 100,000 people who were in the summer sun too long, burning rubber, and fuel exhaust. But I have to admit, there is something enjoyable about the roar of the engines on that first full speed lap, and the tension of the pit stops.
As it turns out, actually going to this stuff, which isn't what I'd normally do, was kind of an interesting experience, and exposed me to seeing some things and some people I wouldn't normally experience. And I kinda feel like that's well beyond the kind of "tolerance" and "openness to diversity" that people who use the term "redneck" in a purely pejorative sense can ever show.
If that's what you mean by empathy, I agree.
So-called "rednecks" often have much less screwed up ideas about things like personal finance, conservancy, food sources, and so on than the college-educated folks who consider themselves superior.
I'm enjoying the fact that I can't tell if you hate the people you refer to as rednecks, or are pointing out the hypocrisy of the left-liberal people who hate people they refer to as rednecks while simultaneously believing they are tolerant and sensitive to the poor and uneducated.
No. If you'd been at an early Tea Party rally, you would know it was attended by 90% people who were fundamentally knowledgeable about and opposed to the private banking cartel known as the Federal Reserve. Later, the Kochs took over and pushed us out, and replaced us with Palinites.
It's understandable a lot of people don't know this, because the media loves to incite emotional responses rather than do reporting.
The only tweak I'd make is to add dialectic (Socratic, not Hegelian or Marxist) to the rhetoric. But try selling a rigorous curriculum like that in today's Humanities departments. 85% of them won't allow it. It's too demanding.
Right. This is why I have such a hard time coming to form opinions on environmental issues; the publicized part of the debate is so polarized, I don't really trust what I read from either side, and have almost assumed the truth is not what either are presenting. Which, unfortunately, doesn't mean something in the middle ground. For example, the debate over CO2 emissions is so focused on increased greenhouse effects (or denial of such) that it wasn't until recently I learned that ocean acidification might be a much more important issue. But I don't really know, because now it's clear that's also a polarized issue.
In my experience, it has more to do with your ability to bargain versus your similarly skilled peers. In my case, I was able to put a VP over a barrel, and get a bigger raise than peers w/ MS degrees when I only had my high school diploma. And, I'll admit, most of them were much better developers than I am. I was able to do this because I had a specific tactical advantage, and pressed very hard, well into the area where losing my job was a possibility. It worked out for me that time. Risk tolerance is probably a bigger factor here than education.
The irony...I switched from a Unix shop to an MS shop to do new stuff, researched and advised about services and recommended WCF when that was the MS advised way to go, and now push WebAPI. Yeah, like he said, I'd rather not have innovation...
I don't know why you got modded down, you're right and funny. That said, WCF is a lot more effort to implement behind an SSL terminating load balancer w/ the username/password auth my boss insisted I use. Took two weeks to figure that out, as opposed to the two hours it took w/ WebAPI. And you can do complex object interactions w/ WebAPI ok by POSTing a JSON object and returning whatever in the doc. You don't lose much w/ WebAPI unless you really need a SOAP interface.
It's the users/developers/admins, not MS -- at least not any more. I have MSDN and have used the support call, and I was impressed. I learned more about debugging on their OS in four hours than in four years on my own (came to an MS shop after 15 years of Unix/Linux). Some awesome stuff; even better than tools I used on Linux or Unix.
Now, a year later, after I "got it" that Windows is TODAY (unlike 15 years ago) a decent OS, I'm using the CLI and scripting in PowerShell and treating the OS with enough respect to learn about it before making judgments. What's interesting is that SO MANY MS devs simply never took the time to learn tools which have been available for 5-10 years to make MS administration relatively modern.
You don't have to touch a mouse to configure a full ASP.Net/IIS application stack on Windows since server 2008. Yet people still do it one machine at a time, manually, doing in five hours of people time what can be done in 15 seconds of people time. And yes, all of it is WELL documented.
Regarding Silverlight, you are factually correct on all points, but even so, app store development is kind of a crap shoot as far as convertibility to money goes, and now those companies are left with "the new IE6" in terms of entrenched intranet applications which the engineering team can't convince management to give them budget to port to a forward-compatible technology, because it's in place, and it works.
WCF isn't dead, no, and I didn't really mean to say that so much. But as the "guy who touted WCF to replace remoting" at my shop, I've also been the loudest voice heard to push people to WebAPI unless they REALLY, REALLY NEED WCF, due to the configuration overhead. WebAPI took me, I don't know, a few hours to implement the first time, as opposed to weeks getting WCF to run w/ SSL termination at a load balancer...there is a place for WCF, but not when you need simple XML or RESTful data interchange.
One thing this should help with is not making devs afraid to adopt a particular technology from MS, which is later trashed due to it having won a political, rather than technical, battle for promotion. For example, WCF was touted as the only way to do XML/HTTP services replacing the binary remoting protocol for several years, and then WebAPI replaced it. WCF devs are now irritated. Same with SilverLight, though WAY worse - "this is THE platform for Windows 8!", then, "Uh, not really.". I get the sense these teams have to compete for their platform to get noticed and marketed, instead of collaborate and take the advantages from two competing platforms.
True. The Republicans (a la RomneyCare) designed it and tried to block its passage; the Democrats say how terrible it is because it was designed by Republicans, and went and passed it anyway.
I dream of only getting a page once every six months).
That's too bad. We have two teams where I work. Mine, which rarely deals with off-hours calls (about once every six months), and the other, which gets woken up multiple times per week. The difference is root cause analysis and fixing broken stuff. How does your manager approach that?
Slashdot Mirror
Trying something different for a while to see if it can work? Giving parents a choice in cases where there might be a better charter school available?
When will the Americans realize that they no longer have any time to waste ?
When it becomes politically acceptable to criticize and act against underperforming administrators, teachers, parents, students, and cultures. Right now, the only allowable form of criticism is against people who say there is enough funding, even though tripling funding in the past 30ish years has not improved results.
I worked with a guy who was really good, top notch. He didn't realize it until he asked me to review his resume that he was coming off incredibly arrogantly in his resume. By toning it down, he had a lot of success - ended up getting some excellent offers well outside his language expertise (from C to Java). Maybe try that? I wouldn't pad. Part of my ease with this is that I'm not a 10/10 guy, maybe a 6/10 or 7/10 coder on a good day, and it doesn't intimidate people.
13 years out of college and you can't get hired? Do you have a professional network of people who have a positive opinion of you and will refer you directly to hiring managers? If so, why not use that avenue? If not, are you sure your self-appraisal is accurate?
It also assumes all you do is code. I'm not just a developer, but a software engineer, which means I oversee environment management, architecture/design, code and configuration management, perform code reviews, support existing products, train other engineers, etc., so while there might be a day or two each year I write 200 or maybe even 300 lines of code, that is extremely rare. Generally I'm happy with 10-20, which fits with what a good supervisor of mine once said that 600 lines per month is a really good rate for reliable code.
40? Whatever. Lots of people in their 40s and 50s and 60s have mediocre jobs writing 200 lines of code per quarter in some large corporation. My team of ten has only two programmers under 40, and just barely (38 and 39).
Just dig in and apply for jobs until you get one. Work as hard as you can at being good at your job.
The original question was whether "you think an abortion, especially during the late term, is killing a human being?"
Whether it *matters to you* if a fetus is a human being isn't the question. It's whether you *think it is* a human being.
Since you continue to avoid answering that question despite multiple independent attempts to get a straight answer out of you, you further reinforce my statement above "I often find that few who are broadly in favor of abortion rights as a form of birth control want to address the specifics of whether a fetus is a human being."
My personal opinion on why that tends to be true is that it takes the argument into a place of moral ambiguity, which interferes with what Glenn Greenwald so brilliantly calls the "desired self-perception" of the person uncomfortable with the ambiguity.
But they tolerate the *right* people. That's what's important.
Strange that you don't think the question matters, since you took the trouble to respond. If you didn't think the question mattered, you wouldn't have responded in the first place. Perhaps there is more to it?
Right or wrong, I often find that few who are broadly in favor of abortion rights as a form of birth control want to address the specifics of whether a fetus is a human being.
Yes.
I had occasion to go to a NASCAR event, and I was surrounded by lots of poor white people (and a smattering of other types) with bad body odor. I wasn't sure if it was just a bad day, and so I went again the next year. Still didn't enjoy it, still hated the smell of 100,000 people who were in the summer sun too long, burning rubber, and fuel exhaust. But I have to admit, there is something enjoyable about the roar of the engines on that first full speed lap, and the tension of the pit stops.
As it turns out, actually going to this stuff, which isn't what I'd normally do, was kind of an interesting experience, and exposed me to seeing some things and some people I wouldn't normally experience. And I kinda feel like that's well beyond the kind of "tolerance" and "openness to diversity" that people who use the term "redneck" in a purely pejorative sense can ever show.
If that's what you mean by empathy, I agree.
So-called "rednecks" often have much less screwed up ideas about things like personal finance, conservancy, food sources, and so on than the college-educated folks who consider themselves superior.
Funny.
I'm enjoying the fact that I can't tell if you hate the people you refer to as rednecks, or are pointing out the hypocrisy of the left-liberal people who hate people they refer to as rednecks while simultaneously believing they are tolerant and sensitive to the poor and uneducated.
It's understandable a lot of people don't know this, because the media loves to incite emotional responses rather than do reporting.
The only tweak I'd make is to add dialectic (Socratic, not Hegelian or Marxist) to the rhetoric. But try selling a rigorous curriculum like that in today's Humanities departments. 85% of them won't allow it. It's too demanding.
How much heat could such a natural reactor generate? Would it be enough to affect local climate? Ocean currents and/or temperatures?
Right. This is why I have such a hard time coming to form opinions on environmental issues; the publicized part of the debate is so polarized, I don't really trust what I read from either side, and have almost assumed the truth is not what either are presenting. Which, unfortunately, doesn't mean something in the middle ground. For example, the debate over CO2 emissions is so focused on increased greenhouse effects (or denial of such) that it wasn't until recently I learned that ocean acidification might be a much more important issue. But I don't really know, because now it's clear that's also a polarized issue.
In my experience, it has more to do with your ability to bargain versus your similarly skilled peers. In my case, I was able to put a VP over a barrel, and get a bigger raise than peers w/ MS degrees when I only had my high school diploma. And, I'll admit, most of them were much better developers than I am. I was able to do this because I had a specific tactical advantage, and pressed very hard, well into the area where losing my job was a possibility. It worked out for me that time. Risk tolerance is probably a bigger factor here than education.
The irony...I switched from a Unix shop to an MS shop to do new stuff, researched and advised about services and recommended WCF when that was the MS advised way to go, and now push WebAPI. Yeah, like he said, I'd rather not have innovation...
I don't know why you got modded down, you're right and funny. That said, WCF is a lot more effort to implement behind an SSL terminating load balancer w/ the username/password auth my boss insisted I use. Took two weeks to figure that out, as opposed to the two hours it took w/ WebAPI. And you can do complex object interactions w/ WebAPI ok by POSTing a JSON object and returning whatever in the doc. You don't lose much w/ WebAPI unless you really need a SOAP interface.
It's the users/developers/admins, not MS -- at least not any more. I have MSDN and have used the support call, and I was impressed. I learned more about debugging on their OS in four hours than in four years on my own (came to an MS shop after 15 years of Unix/Linux). Some awesome stuff; even better than tools I used on Linux or Unix.
Now, a year later, after I "got it" that Windows is TODAY (unlike 15 years ago) a decent OS, I'm using the CLI and scripting in PowerShell and treating the OS with enough respect to learn about it before making judgments. What's interesting is that SO MANY MS devs simply never took the time to learn tools which have been available for 5-10 years to make MS administration relatively modern.
You don't have to touch a mouse to configure a full ASP.Net/IIS application stack on Windows since server 2008. Yet people still do it one machine at a time, manually, doing in five hours of people time what can be done in 15 seconds of people time. And yes, all of it is WELL documented.
Regarding Silverlight, you are factually correct on all points, but even so, app store development is kind of a crap shoot as far as convertibility to money goes, and now those companies are left with "the new IE6" in terms of entrenched intranet applications which the engineering team can't convince management to give them budget to port to a forward-compatible technology, because it's in place, and it works.
WCF isn't dead, no, and I didn't really mean to say that so much. But as the "guy who touted WCF to replace remoting" at my shop, I've also been the loudest voice heard to push people to WebAPI unless they REALLY, REALLY NEED WCF, due to the configuration overhead. WebAPI took me, I don't know, a few hours to implement the first time, as opposed to weeks getting WCF to run w/ SSL termination at a load balancer...there is a place for WCF, but not when you need simple XML or RESTful data interchange.
One thing this should help with is not making devs afraid to adopt a particular technology from MS, which is later trashed due to it having won a political, rather than technical, battle for promotion. For example, WCF was touted as the only way to do XML/HTTP services replacing the binary remoting protocol for several years, and then WebAPI replaced it. WCF devs are now irritated. Same with SilverLight, though WAY worse - "this is THE platform for Windows 8!", then, "Uh, not really.". I get the sense these teams have to compete for their platform to get noticed and marketed, instead of collaborate and take the advantages from two competing platforms.
True. The Republicans (a la RomneyCare) designed it and tried to block its passage; the Democrats say how terrible it is because it was designed by Republicans, and went and passed it anyway.
Worth it? I've always preferred a slightly larger company to avoid these problems...and have no interest in management.
I dream of only getting a page once every six months).
That's too bad. We have two teams where I work. Mine, which rarely deals with off-hours calls (about once every six months), and the other, which gets woken up multiple times per week. The difference is root cause analysis and fixing broken stuff. How does your manager approach that?