Seriously. BA in a science is a _huge_ red flag. Never hire them. Your school should reconsider, if only to avoid the resume stain effect. It would be like calling all the degrees education degrees. Sure it might make the education degrees a little more valuable, but it would fuck everybody else.
Sorry, but no, your blanket statement about science B.A.'s is just wrong.
I did my bachelors in Physics at Cornell. The only thing that was offered to Physics majors was a B.A., since the Physics department was in the Arts & Sciences college. And yes, I had 6 semesters of math (calculus, linear algebra, vector calculus, complex analysis, etc.) If you don't want to hire me because Cornell gave me an inferior degree, well, your loss.
In reality, the distinction between B.A., and B.S., often has quite a bit to do with how the particular university is organized, and has precious little to do with curriculum.
Corporate users who can't update their browsers because of some persnickety internal application they have to use, but who then go and use that same browser on the public Internet. By unleashing these obsolete browsers on the world at large, these corporate users make the Web worse for everyone. Web developers have to target the lowest common denominator, and the corporations are making that lowest common denominator that much lower.
And the best way to resolve that is to alienate the enterprise even more . ..???
At least at the end of the article, the author discusses having enterprise releases and internal updates. But the kiddies running this show need to realize that the big boy adults (i.e. the enterprise) are going to be the ones that drive the significant majority of sites/work on the web. Just saying, "oh go away I don't want to deal with you" only leads us right back to supporting IE6.
It was loads of fun and a total walk down memory lane. It's got a great selection of historical hardware -- Magnavox Odyssey, Intellivsion, early Gameboys, an Apple ][e, Football, etc. (Just seeing new people come in and look to find their earliest game system and smile was worth it by itself.)
Also, they've got some great experimental games, especially the PainStation (how much phyiscal pain will you take to defeat your opponent). The discussion of how they designed Pong was interesting, the wall of old Computer Games (Zork, Leisure Suit Larry, etc.) was fun.
On the Karl-Marx-Allee in the old East Berlin. I spent a couple hours just looking, playing and reminiscing. And almost all of it is in both German and English.
However, it does make one wonder why O'Reilly would publish it.
Because in the thirty years since Brooks wrote the first edition, computers are a few times more powerful, at least an order of magnitude cheaper, and modern programmers have the opportunity to be maybe twice as productive as those who wrote OS/360 in assembly.
The question is not 'Why would Oreilly publish a reconsideration of TMMM?' -- the question is 'Why would Oreilly publish this pathetic attempt at a reconsideration of TMMM?'
There's the juvenality of pointing out anachronisms that takes up the first part of the article.
But it keeps getting just as bad. In response to the 'solving bugs introduces between 20 & 50 % risk of new bugs,' we get:
I do not believe the risks to be this high now in any reasonably well-run organization. They may come close to 20 but should be nowhere near 50 percent. In short, we can claim have become better at maintenance over the past 30 years.
It's these off-the-cuff dismissals of TMMM w/o any backup or sense of experience that make the review largely irrelevant. If this was an experienced developer/development team updating TMMM for today's generation that would be one thing. But the whole article just reeks of a newbie trying to act all 'that'.
For starters, only 1/2 of the interior is shut off. USGS, the Park Service and others are up. The Bureau of Reclamation, the Bureau of Indian affairs (duh), the Bureau of Land Management, and some other offices are down.
The kicker pages that say what Interior must do are pp. 26-29. The order does outline some intrusion attempts that were successful at parts of Interior.
The Plantiff's site gives an overview of the case--it's written by the Indian Plantiff, so it's biased, but still pretty accurate.
Background: this is all about trust fund monies that in the late 1800's the U.S. Government said to Indian tribes: "We'll manage the monies that are made from drilling, mining, etc. your reservation land. Trust Us! PS: You don't have a choice." Then, the Gov't took the money and said buzz off to the Indians. In the 1990's, some Indians sue, and say where's our money -- Interior says, I dunno.
Is the judge vindictive -- probably. But it's not that different from Hanging Judge Jackson in the MS Anti-Trust case -- the judge may be pissed off, but he's got that way from years of dealing with the incompetence of Interior.
The point here is that one would generally consider a public library a place where one could let one's children go safely and without supervision instead of worrying about pornography and whatnot.
Librarians hate you, you know. I worked at a community library in high school and nsupervised children were a huge problem. You can't just kick them out when they make noise or generally act like unsupervised children.
Agreed. Growing up, I worked many years in libraries, my mother has been a librarian all her life, as was my grandmother. One of the most difficult duties was dealing with children whose parents expected the library to function as a free day-care facility/nanny/entertainment complex, where they could temporarily dispose of their children.
The main branch of the library was a block away from a major mall. When my mother used to work the evening shifts, many times she would have to sit with children after the library had closed waiting for their parents to come back from shopping. She'ld have to find ways to get children to shut up, stop bothering other patrons, and behave, all the while having to do it in a way that would protect her butt from the parents who would come back and complain that she 'She had no right to tell her children anything.'
Internet porn is a real problem for libraries. I doubt many librarians would disagree--I know my mom wouldn't and we've had many discussions about the efficacy of filtering programs. But you'll never find the librarian who would say that filters should be installed so that it's 'safe or ok' to let children run wild and free in the library.
BUT having said that after 33 years even the music is a bit old.
Um, the music was old even before the movie came out. It's just classical scores.
I don't know if the person realized it, but the original comment is half-correct. Most of the weird music in the film was by Gyorgy Ligeti (b. 1923), a Hungarian composer who today lives in Germany & Austria.
Four pieces of his are in the film:
Atmospheres, written in 1961,
Requiem, written in 1965,
Lux Aeterna, written in 1966, and
Adventures, written in 1962.
These pieces are in the Star Gate sequence, in the moon shuttle sequence (where Floyd et.al. take the small shuttle to see the Monolith, after the security briefing), and in the scenes at the end in the 'Baroque Hotel Room'.
Reportedly, Ligeti didn't even know his music was being used until he saw or heard from people who had seen the film. Since he got paid nothing he ended up suing MGM, and they later reached a financial settlement. He was also upset that they altered Adventures to create the alien 'voices' in the 'Baroque Hotel Room' sequence at the end.
Mike
(Contemporary Classical Music is not a contradiction in terms!!)
But I know that if an online business came out and said "one out of every hundred purchasers will randomly receive a five dollar credit towards their next purchase," the gubment would go nuts.
They most certainly would not. All sorts of promotions and contests work this way. Take for example the contest gamepieces you get at fast food restaurants -- like McDonald's Monopoly game or whatever.
You get your card when you buy a burger and scratch off to see what you've won. Maybe you've got a 1 in 10 chance of getting a free fries during your next visit.
What the government would go nuts over would be if the pricing or discounting was done in a NON-random manner. (e.g. all white people get free fries while everyone else pays.)
As long as its non-discriminatory, differential pricing is something that's been happening in the off-line world for years. Just because it's on-line doesn't mean it's new!
Excuse me, lawyer, but I think the summarization by Hemos confused you.
At the point that this motion was argued, he was NOT CONVICTED YET.
To quote from the article in the NYT: "During the pre-trial discovery phase of the case, the gov't lawyer . . indicated that . . . he would hand all of the seized files . . . except the encrypted ones."
Also, 3 paras later, it says: "The defense also argued that the encrypted files might include information that could help Mitnick defend himself." This defense argument would make no sense if the motion had not be argued prior to conviction (or perhaps as part of an appeal to the conviction).
next para: "Painter [the gov't lawyer] replied that because the government could not understand what was in the files, it could not use the files as evidence at trial."
several paras later: "In considering the matter, Judge Pfaelzer said that it was "clever" of Mitnick to have encrypted the files in such a way that the government could not use them in its own case, but Mitnick could access them if given a copy."
All of this points to the fact that the motion was not post-conviction, but prior to conviction at-trial.
(Emphasis in all quotes added.)
Note that the article does mention a date of May 20, 1998 -- this seems too late, since I thought he was convicted by that point, so perhaps this date is a typo. Anyway, what do you believe -- a single date reference, or the logic of the arguments by both sides. caveat: IANAL, though I have taken some law courses.
Slashdot Mirror
Must be a liberal arts school.
. . .
Seriously. BA in a science is a _huge_ red flag. Never hire them. Your school should reconsider, if only to avoid the resume stain effect. It would be like calling all the degrees education degrees. Sure it might make the education degrees a little more valuable, but it would fuck everybody else.
Sorry, but no, your blanket statement about science B.A.'s is just wrong.
I did my bachelors in Physics at Cornell. The only thing that was offered to Physics majors was a B.A., since the Physics department was in the Arts & Sciences college. And yes, I had 6 semesters of math (calculus, linear algebra, vector calculus, complex analysis, etc.) If you don't want to hire me because Cornell gave me an inferior degree, well, your loss.
In reality, the distinction between B.A., and B.S., often has quite a bit to do with how the particular university is organized, and has precious little to do with curriculum.
And the best way to resolve that is to alienate the enterprise even more . . .???
At least at the end of the article, the author discusses having enterprise releases and internal updates. But the kiddies running this show need to realize that the big boy adults (i.e. the enterprise) are going to be the ones that drive the significant majority of sites/work on the web. Just saying, "oh go away I don't want to deal with you" only leads us right back to supporting IE6.
The computerspielemuseum.
It was loads of fun and a total walk down memory lane. It's got a great selection of historical hardware -- Magnavox Odyssey, Intellivsion, early Gameboys, an Apple ][e, Football, etc. (Just seeing new people come in and look to find their earliest game system and smile was worth it by itself.)
Also, they've got some great experimental games, especially the PainStation (how much phyiscal pain will you take to defeat your opponent). The discussion of how they designed Pong was interesting, the wall of old Computer Games (Zork, Leisure Suit Larry, etc.) was fun.
On the Karl-Marx-Allee in the old East Berlin. I spent a couple hours just looking, playing and reminiscing. And almost all of it is in both German and English.
America hasn't been one for about 150 years,
Oh, that's true -- back when we had slavery we were really free.
There's the juvenality of pointing out anachronisms that takes up the first part of the article.
But it keeps getting just as bad. In response to the 'solving bugs introduces between 20 & 50 % risk of new bugs,' we get:It's these off-the-cuff dismissals of TMMM w/o any backup or sense of experience that make the review largely irrelevant. If this was an experienced developer/development team updating TMMM for today's generation that would be one thing. But the whole article just reeks of a newbie trying to act all 'that'.
For starters, only 1/2 of the interior is shut off. USGS, the Park Service and others are up. The Bureau of Reclamation, the Bureau of Indian affairs (duh), the Bureau of Land Management, and some other offices are down.
The judge's order is archived
here
The kicker pages that say what Interior must do are pp. 26-29. The order does outline some intrusion attempts that were successful at parts of Interior.
The Plantiff's site gives an overview of the case--it's written by the Indian Plantiff, so it's biased, but still pretty accurate.
Background: this is all about trust fund monies that in the late 1800's the U.S. Government said to Indian tribes: "We'll manage the monies that are made from drilling, mining, etc. your reservation land. Trust Us! PS: You don't have a choice." Then, the Gov't took the money and said buzz off to the Indians. In the 1990's, some Indians sue, and say where's our money -- Interior says, I dunno.
Is the judge vindictive -- probably. But it's not that different from Hanging Judge Jackson in the MS Anti-Trust case -- the judge may be pissed off, but he's got that way from years of dealing with the incompetence of Interior.
M
Librarians hate you, you know. I worked at a community library in high school and nsupervised children were a huge problem. You can't just kick them out when they make noise or generally act like unsupervised children.
Agreed. Growing up, I worked many years in libraries, my mother has been a librarian all her life, as was my grandmother. One of the most difficult duties was dealing with children whose parents expected the library to function as a free day-care facility/nanny/entertainment complex, where they could temporarily dispose of their children.
The main branch of the library was a block away from a major mall. When my mother used to work the evening shifts, many times she would have to sit with children after the library had closed waiting for their parents to come back from shopping. She'ld have to find ways to get children to shut up, stop bothering other patrons, and behave, all the while having to do it in a way that would protect her butt from the parents who would come back and complain that she 'She had no right to tell her children anything.'
Internet porn is a real problem for libraries. I doubt many librarians would disagree--I know my mom wouldn't and we've had many discussions about the efficacy of filtering programs. But you'll never find the librarian who would say that filters should be installed so that it's 'safe or ok' to let children run wild and free in the library.
Four pieces of his are in the film:
- Atmospheres, written in 1961,
- Requiem, written in 1965,
- Lux Aeterna, written in 1966, and
- Adventures, written in 1962.
These pieces are in the Star Gate sequence, in the moon shuttle sequence (where Floyd et.al. take the small shuttle to see the Monolith, after the security briefing), and in the scenes at the end in the 'Baroque Hotel Room'.Reportedly, Ligeti didn't even know his music was being used until he saw or heard from people who had seen the film. Since he got paid nothing he ended up suing MGM, and they later reached a financial settlement. He was also upset that they altered Adventures to create the alien 'voices' in the 'Baroque Hotel Room' sequence at the end.
Mike
(Contemporary Classical Music is not a contradiction in terms!!)
They most certainly would not. All sorts of promotions and contests work this way. Take for example the contest gamepieces you get at fast food restaurants -- like McDonald's Monopoly game or whatever. You get your card when you buy a burger and scratch off to see what you've won. Maybe you've got a 1 in 10 chance of getting a free fries during your next visit.
What the government would go nuts over would be if the pricing or discounting was done in a NON-random manner. (e.g. all white people get free fries while everyone else pays.)
As long as its non-discriminatory, differential pricing is something that's been happening in the off-line world for years. Just because it's on-line doesn't mean it's new!
At the point that this motion was argued, he was NOT CONVICTED YET.
To quote from the article in the NYT: "During the pre-trial discovery phase of the case, the gov't lawyer . . indicated that . . . he would hand all of the seized files . . . except the encrypted ones."
Also, 3 paras later, it says: "The defense also argued that the encrypted files might include information that could help Mitnick defend himself." This defense argument would make no sense if the motion had not be argued prior to conviction (or perhaps as part of an appeal to the conviction).
next para: "Painter [the gov't lawyer] replied that because the government could not understand what was in the files, it could not use the files as evidence at trial."
several paras later: "In considering the matter, Judge Pfaelzer said that it was "clever" of Mitnick to have encrypted the files in such a way that the government could not use them in its own case, but Mitnick could access them if given a copy."
All of this points to the fact that the motion was not post-conviction, but prior to conviction at-trial.
(Emphasis in all quotes added.)
Note that the article does mention a date of May 20, 1998 -- this seems too late, since I thought he was convicted by that point, so perhaps this date is a typo. Anyway, what do you believe -- a single date reference, or the logic of the arguments by both sides. caveat: IANAL, though I have taken some law courses.