Plone/Zope are great. You likely just don't understand them. Check out: ZCA, Adaptation and Marker Interfaces. We use these concepts extensively at my work and they save us a lot of time particularly around componentizing are capabilities.
Re:Ruby could be the answer as well
on
Open Source Math
·
· Score: 1
Hmm.
for k in myhash.keys():
print "$s: $s" % (k, myhash[k])
for l in open("somefile.txt").readlines():
print l
Not sure what the big deal is. Python seems just as clean to me (to be kind).
11 one stars, 36 5 stars. I have seen this DVD and it is literally propagandist pseudo science put out by a cult for recruitment. Check into it on Google. Yet it has a pretty stellar rating on Amazon.
The author of the book in this review is supposedly a member of the John Birch society, real wackos. It's likely propaganda for their organization.
"If the IT field rejects me as a person for personal reasons [...]"
I think your conflating your current job dissatisfaction with all of the IT world. IT is a big space. Your current company (30 people) is not. If your down to a decision between being "you" and doing IT maybe you don't really like IT all that much anyway and should explore another field.
"I don't have the *ahem* "balls" to play rough with the boys... that just doesn't work for me at all. Never has, never will."
If you are at a feminine extreme as you seem to be implying I can see where it would be especially difficult for you. At the extremes men and women approach problem solving in largely incompatible ways. This is something I'm still working on with my wife:).
I'll leave that soft underbelly to my argument exposed so you can stick a knife in it if you like. I do see your point but am not sure of the solution. In fact, I'll retract the "If your down to a decision" statement as well.
"[...] doesn't mean that you should tell them that they don't deserve to be there."
Nobody is saying that females do not deserve to be in IT. What is being said is that males should change so that females feel more welcome. I'm not really inclined to agree to this however. I think you could learn a lot from your co-worker. It sounds like she has met the men at least half way.
If you are branded as a complainer it is probably because your approach to raising issues is not all that great. It's something I have had to spend a lot of time working on myself. It may be a gender thing but expecting your manager (or whoever you are criticizing) to change is not going to work. You need to develop your skills at office politics. Knowing how men think and exploiting that rather than feeling that they need to change to suit you would be far more productive.
As to your emotionality and passivity I think that could be a disastrous combination if you get emotional and than back down. It would leave a group of men wondering what all the fuss was about if you don't feel strongly enough to stand behind what you say. They would learn to expect this from you and start to get dismissive as an expedient. Just my thoughts on that.
No, they asked him several time during his speech to sit down and he brushed them off. Thats all the "He spoke for 2 hours I can speak for two minutes" and "Yes thank, I'll ask my question and two other questions I have thank you...etc etc.".
The guy was asked to stop, than cops tried to escort him, than he started running around with his arms up. Than he started going crazy. Even after they had him on the ground he was still trying to get up.
I do think the situation could have been handled better. It's obvious in hind site how things *could have happened better*. But, I don't think any of the cops expected that he would be such an insane jackass and they lost control. It seems to me like he figured he was a white rich kid and so he was entitled to do whatever it was he was trying to accomplish. When things went from "academic" to "reality" he started to get scared and was in disbelief that he would get cuffed and taken away. That "reality gap" between what he wanted and what the police were doing is why he got tased. I do not think that taser was called for, but that does not mean he did not deserve to get escorted out of the building. All the commotion was caused by his resisting of, not being arrested, but simply being asked and than forced to leave.
My reply was to someone claiming that people were erroneously upset about this whole fiasco because they thought the firings themselves were illigal. I have not heard this argument yet the original poster made it sound like this was the primary case against the AG, that the firings themselves were illegal. What I have heard is that the firings were unprecedented and attacked the foundations of what the justice dept. is supposed to do which is provide a non partisan application of the law. As for the AG himself, he likely did commit numerous cases of purgery against himself while trying to cover up what has been uncovered as a partisan plot to undermine the justice dept. and use it as a political tool for acquiring power.
What the Bush administration has been adept at doing is staying within the lines of the law by grossly misinterpreting it's language. Under intense questioning their arguments do seem to cave in however meaning that there is still a glimmer of hope. It is going to take a sustained effort, likely over a decade, to undo the damage that has been done to the US by this administration however.
I would say that loyalty includes a sense of self interest and possibly faith. Faith is an expedient when full analysis is simply not possible, practicable or desirable. People change and so you may respect someone one day and not on another only to respect them again at some later date. I suppose loyalty can be fickle as well but it is generally less tolerated as such. People who are loyal are in it for the long haul.
Loyalty is a powerful virtue when it is earned. It will always be needed because it is integral to human interaction and behavior. The question is what are you loyal too and why? The act of loyalty itself does not excuse you from the decisions nor the associations you make.
"I may have misinterpreted, but did you just imply that the scientific method is the "method de jour"? If so, it's certainly had a pretty good "jour" so far."
Well, it's still mostly what all the kids are into these days. Now Aristotle's methods have some history behind them and before that it was the gods themselves that lifted us from anarchy. Look where they got us to today!
Alchemists laid the ground work for chemistry, yes. It does seem that the crackpots lead the way, even if they completely fail the scientific method, they were on to something. It might be Boyle who gets the credit for creating modern chemistry but it seems chemistry required Alchemy in order to accrue those first few seminal insights, as messy as they were. In their day Alchemists were both revered and persecuted and probably had an idiot to earnestness ratio similar to paranormal researchers today.
Also discounting a body of work/by association/ isn't in line with the scientific method. Each proposition should stand or be defeated on it's own. Otherwise Newton's theories should be discarded as well.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
It takes more then simply applying the method de jour to prove or disprove a radical idea. Unless you enjoy simply being told what the latest ground breaking discovery was. There are crackpots in every field, probably the most are in the accepted fields as they can hide behind an air of credibility as they piss away grant dollars.
"I'd say it puts our lifespans into perspective. We really don't live long enough to play in this game."
Depends on what you consider a "life span". Having children carry on our genes can be seen as a continuum. Maybe our egos don't live long enough to think it's worth it?
It's a definition from the guy who defined it. Kind of like reading Einstein go on about relativity.
"About the only thing you can take away from it is that Fascism values authority.."
Only if you're a dimwit.
"Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace."
"Fascism [is] the complete opposite of...Marxian Socialism, the materialist conception of history of human civilization can be explained simply through the conflict of interests among the various social groups and by the change and development in the means and instruments of production..."
"For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence."
"If every age has its own characteristic doctrine, there are a thousand signs which point to Fascism as the characteristic doctrine of our time. For if a doctrine must be a living thing, this is proved by the fact that Fascism has created a living faith; and that this faith is very powerful in the minds of men is demonstrated by those who have suffered and died for it."
"..iven that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority...a century of Fascism."
What it is coming down to is that only a very few extremists support the "standards" of the Bush administration. Seeing how they twist legal language to justify their ends I have endless sympathy and support for the underground movement in Washington that is attempting to save the US from catastrophic constitutional meltdown.
America is a weaker Nation thanks to Bush and the neo-cons. At least some are going down swinging.
The transportation department is aware of the deficiencies with the Big Dig. They are planning on moving the express way to a bridge that snakes/through the city/ and fill the tunnel with Spectacle Island. No harm no foul.
I went back through the thread and either did not see the joke that started it or just didn't get it. If it was a joke and light hearted than it's your own fault for digging in so deep. This war and this administration is not a joke to a lot of people. It's that other thing, tragedy. So don't be surprised and indignant if people don't get your jokes.
I could compare it to a carton of milk if you prefer. Some guy steals a carton of milk. But it's been done before so give the guy a break.
I get your point about zealots. However, it does not mean that everything is some dull shade of Grey. And arguing that it is against someone who is well informed, well intentioned and passionate about their beliefs makes you less than useless.
Evil is just as good an adjective as "Charitable", "Funny", or "Dull". It's a warning. Heed it or not at your own peril.
Kind Regards
p.s. please don't try to refine your point. I get it. It's just not useful to limit the dialog by words. Evil is a great term to describe this administration. They do evil things.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you really surprised that such a book is needed? Hello user-land questions, now answered.
Plone/Zope are great. You likely just don't understand them. Check out: ZCA, Adaptation and Marker Interfaces. We use these concepts extensively at my work and they save us a lot of time particularly around componentizing are capabilities.
Hmm.
for k in myhash.keys():
print "$s: $s" % (k, myhash[k])
for l in open("somefile.txt").readlines():
print l
Not sure what the big deal is. Python seems just as clean to me (to be kind).
Just to pile it on, you kinda started the whole thinking thing...
But by installing Storm they accepted the Storm license. They're the only ones that *are* liable.
Check out the distribution on this utter garbage:
http://www.amazon.com/What-Bleep-Know-Discovering-Possibilities/dp/0757305628/ref=pd_bbs_sr_3/002-2908185-7396820?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1190857645&sr=8-3
11 one stars, 36 5 stars. I have seen this DVD and it is literally propagandist pseudo science put out by a cult for recruitment. Check into it on Google. Yet it has a pretty stellar rating on Amazon.
The author of the book in this review is supposedly a member of the John Birch society, real wackos. It's likely propaganda for their organization.
Kind Regards
"[...] do I be myself, or do I keep this job?"
:).
"If the IT field rejects me as a person for personal reasons [...]"
I think your conflating your current job dissatisfaction with all of the IT world. IT is a big space. Your current company (30 people) is not. If your down to a decision between being "you" and doing IT maybe you don't really like IT all that much anyway and should explore another field.
"I don't have the *ahem* "balls" to play rough with the boys... that just doesn't work for me at all. Never has, never will."
If you are at a feminine extreme as you seem to be implying I can see where it would be especially difficult for you. At the extremes men and women approach problem solving in largely incompatible ways. This is something I'm still working on with my wife
I'll leave that soft underbelly to my argument exposed so you can stick a knife in it if you like. I do see your point but am not sure of the solution. In fact, I'll retract the "If your down to a decision" statement as well.
Hmmm.
Hmmm, going to have to noodle on this awhile.
Kind Regards
"[...] doesn't mean that you should tell them that they don't deserve to be there."
Nobody is saying that females do not deserve to be in IT. What is being said is that males should change so that females feel more welcome. I'm not really inclined to agree to this however. I think you could learn a lot from your co-worker. It sounds like she has met the men at least half way.
If you are branded as a complainer it is probably because your approach to raising issues is not all that great. It's something I have had to spend a lot of time working on myself. It may be a gender thing but expecting your manager (or whoever you are criticizing) to change is not going to work. You need to develop your skills at office politics. Knowing how men think and exploiting that rather than feeling that they need to change to suit you would be far more productive.
As to your emotionality and passivity I think that could be a disastrous combination if you get emotional and than back down. It would leave a group of men wondering what all the fuss was about if you don't feel strongly enough to stand behind what you say. They would learn to expect this from you and start to get dismissive as an expedient. Just my thoughts on that.
Kind Regards
No, they asked him several time during his speech to sit down and he brushed them off. Thats all the "He spoke for 2 hours I can speak for two minutes" and "Yes thank, I'll ask my question and two other questions I have thank you...etc etc.".
The guy was asked to stop, than cops tried to escort him, than he started running around with his arms up. Than he started going crazy. Even after they had him on the ground he was still trying to get up.
I do think the situation could have been handled better. It's obvious in hind site how things *could have happened better*. But, I don't think any of the cops expected that he would be such an insane jackass and they lost control. It seems to me like he figured he was a white rich kid and so he was entitled to do whatever it was he was trying to accomplish. When things went from "academic" to "reality" he started to get scared and was in disbelief that he would get cuffed and taken away. That "reality gap" between what he wanted and what the police were doing is why he got tased. I do not think that taser was called for, but that does not mean he did not deserve to get escorted out of the building. All the commotion was caused by his resisting of, not being arrested, but simply being asked and than forced to leave.
Kind Regards
My reply was to someone claiming that people were erroneously upset about this whole fiasco because they thought the firings themselves were illigal. I have not heard this argument yet the original poster made it sound like this was the primary case against the AG, that the firings themselves were illegal. What I have heard is that the firings were unprecedented and attacked the foundations of what the justice dept. is supposed to do which is provide a non partisan application of the law. As for the AG himself, he likely did commit numerous cases of purgery against himself while trying to cover up what has been uncovered as a partisan plot to undermine the justice dept. and use it as a political tool for acquiring power.
What the Bush administration has been adept at doing is staying within the lines of the law by grossly misinterpreting it's language. Under intense questioning their arguments do seem to cave in however meaning that there is still a glimmer of hope. It is going to take a sustained effort, likely over a decade, to undo the damage that has been done to the US by this administration however.
I would say that loyalty includes a sense of self interest and possibly faith. Faith is an expedient when full analysis is simply not possible, practicable or desirable. People change and so you may respect someone one day and not on another only to respect them again at some later date. I suppose loyalty can be fickle as well but it is generally less tolerated as such. People who are loyal are in it for the long haul.
I've never heard anyone say that the firings themselves were illegal. Where did you get this idea?
Loyalty is a powerful virtue when it is earned. It will always be needed because it is integral to human interaction and behavior. The question is what are you loyal too and why? The act of loyalty itself does not excuse you from the decisions nor the associations you make.
So maybe we will know the author of this article for his discovery of life on Mars and not for his crackpot ideas on ESP?
If that is what you think of alchemy than you do not understand the history of alchemy.
Kind Regards
"I may have misinterpreted, but did you just imply that the scientific method is the "method de jour"? If so, it's certainly had a pretty good "jour" so far."
/by association/ isn't in line with the scientific method. Each proposition should stand or be defeated on it's own. Otherwise Newton's theories should be discarded as well.
Well, it's still mostly what all the kids are into these days. Now Aristotle's methods have some history behind them and before that it was the gods themselves that lifted us from anarchy. Look where they got us to today!
Alchemists laid the ground work for chemistry, yes. It does seem that the crackpots lead the way, even if they completely fail the scientific method, they were on to something. It might be Boyle who gets the credit for creating modern chemistry but it seems chemistry required Alchemy in order to accrue those first few seminal insights, as messy as they were. In their day Alchemists were both revered and persecuted and probably had an idiot to earnestness ratio similar to paranormal researchers today.
Also discounting a body of work
Kind Regards
just as a side note.
Kind Regards
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
It takes more then simply applying the method de jour to prove or disprove a radical idea. Unless you enjoy simply being told what the latest ground breaking discovery was. There are crackpots in every field, probably the most are in the accepted fields as they can hide behind an air of credibility as they piss away grant dollars.
Kind Regards
"I'd say it puts our lifespans into perspective. We really don't live long enough to play in this game."
Depends on what you consider a "life span". Having children carry on our genes can be seen as a continuum. Maybe our egos don't live long enough to think it's worth it?
Kind Regards
It's a definition from the guy who defined it. Kind of like reading Einstein go on about relativity.
"About the only thing you can take away from it is that Fascism values authority.."
Only if you're a dimwit.
"Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace."
"Fascism [is] the complete opposite of...Marxian Socialism, the materialist conception of history of human civilization can be explained simply through the conflict of interests among the various social groups and by the change and development in the means and instruments of production..."
"For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence."
"If every age has its own characteristic doctrine, there are a thousand signs which point to Fascism as the characteristic doctrine of our time. For if a doctrine must be a living thing, this is proved by the fact that Fascism has created a living faith; and that this faith is very powerful in the minds of men is demonstrated by those who have suffered and died for it."
"..iven that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority...a century of Fascism."
What it is coming down to is that only a very few extremists support the "standards" of the Bush administration. Seeing how they twist legal language to justify their ends I have endless sympathy and support for the underground movement in Washington that is attempting to save the US from catastrophic constitutional meltdown.
America is a weaker Nation thanks to Bush and the neo-cons. At least some are going down swinging.
Kind Regards
Even with your numbers, for the cost of the USA's war on Iraq we could have clean safe energy forever.
Kind Regards
The transportation department is aware of the deficiencies with the Big Dig. They are planning on moving the express way to a bridge that snakes /through the city/ and fill the tunnel with Spectacle Island. No harm no foul.
I went back through the thread and either did not see the joke that started it or just didn't get it. If it was a joke and light hearted than it's your own fault for digging in so deep. This war and this administration is not a joke to a lot of people. It's that other thing, tragedy. So don't be surprised and indignant if people don't get your jokes.
Kind Regards
I could compare it to a carton of milk if you prefer. Some guy steals a carton of milk. But it's been done before so give the guy a break.
I get your point about zealots. However, it does not mean that everything is some dull shade of Grey. And arguing that it is against someone who is well informed, well intentioned and passionate about their beliefs makes you less than useless.
Kind Regards
Evil is just as good an adjective as "Charitable", "Funny", or "Dull". It's a warning. Heed it or not at your own peril.
Kind Regards
p.s. please don't try to refine your point. I get it. It's just not useful to limit the dialog by words. Evil is a great term to describe this administration. They do evil things.