People who view themselves as do-gooders and take so much pride in their righteousness scare me. If history has taught us anything, generally people who think they have a monopoly on good tend to end up doing bad.
Ok. I get you now. I thought you were suggesting, very literally, that employees only take home minimum wage plus "typical" bonus. You're simply talking about a model that we aren't all used to.
And... uh... do you by any chance know me??? (Chicagoland, salary in the post. interesting...)
I'm really confused. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt here: You say IT people should have a good attitude about working for you for minimum wage? Am I missing something?
Do YOU work for minimum wage?
You're right, you wouldn't hire me, because I wouldn't work for minimum wage. I'd sooner get a job at Jiffy Lube. But, so far, I've been able to keep jobs that pay me very well for my skills. My boss appreciates my skills, thank goodness.
Nevermind the fact that all your employees are probably frustrated that you are busy trying see how much work you can squeeze out of them for how little money. You don't sound like the kind of person I would work very hard for.
Nobody is forcing you to have cable service. It costs a lot, I know, buy you can live without it. Man, you people have some real sense of entitlement, don't you?
The TV stations are going to have to do something, and if TIVO can integrate ads the way Google/Yahoo have, maybe it will work. Those shows we love to watch--they aren't free, ya know. Advertisers don't like paying big $$$ for an ad that will just get fast forwarded through.
My point was that I've been reading since 1998 now on slashdot that MS is doing horrible, losing share to open source and going to go bankrupt in "just a few more years."
But Microsoft seems as strong as ever. Firefox is making minimal dents in IE and Linux has made no dent in Windows to speak up. They serve different purposes and markets. No matter how much Slashdotters long for the demis of MS, it doesn't seem to be happening.
The truth is MS users will wait that long. They don't have a choice and MOST users (not slashdot types) don't care what OS they use, they just want their computer to work. They don't know about the details at the level that we here do. MS isn't going to lose anything, they are simply to strong and ingrained in the market. Its the truth...
"Anyone could predict that microsoft is currently vulnerable. They are losing their sustainable competative advantage and losing their market domination cannot be too far off."
U, really? This doesn't seem to be the truth. I know you probably don't like MS, but spewing lies doesn't change anything.
I'll take it--and I hope he's right. There are many MS cynics here. This comment will either bite Bill or lead to great things for Microsoft. So be it. Why be angry?
Fix what? Remove the freedom of speech that says "there are alternative theories to evolution"?
The heart of this debate is not whether or not you believe in evolution, its how it should be taught--as theory or fact? Do parents have rights to tell their kids that they don't believe the science book? Do kids have the right to know that not everyone subscribes to evolution?
Stick to the debate at hand-don't go off on a tangent because of your distaste for religion.
Ok, I'll give you that, but the heart of this debate is still the same: should kids be taught that evolution is fact or theory? Should they be made aware that not all believe it or subscribe to it? Is this okay?
The zealousness that leads to evoltion being forced from schools is the same kind of zealousness that the evolutionists are using to present their theory as the only viable one. What is the fear of these simple little stickers? I don't get it!
Why attack me personally? The point I was trying to make is that evolution should be taught as it as--as a theory.
You might be surprised to know that I, a Christian, think evolution SHOULD be taught in school---as a theory, which it is. Don't try to tell the kids its a proven fact. Allow this debate to happen and allow kids to participate in it.
The stickers in text books were only an attempt to make it known that there are alternative views to evolution. Why do you have a problem with this? Why do you say that I am crazy? Do you know me?
Once again, you are changing the debate. Should evolution be taught as fact or theory? What say to parents have in the matter? Any?
I'm not arguing for or against evolution, but you can't teach things as fact unless they are indeed facts. The verdict is still out on evolution. This is all I am trying to say.
We can agree to disagree about my religion and faith, and we're not debating that. We're debating education. Teach evolution-I'm all for that-but teach it as it is-as a theory.
Where is the fossil record the the "partial wing"--the one that was growing but had yet to produce results? Where is the fossil record for the partial gil--the gil that didn't yet breath but was existing in order that some relatives would grow one that did work?
The fossil record is incomplete. Mutations NEVER result in good changes in the near generation, and therefor the extended generation. So evolution remains only a fallible theory.
I could go into all the times I've witnessed God, but you wouldn't believe me, so why bother.
Slashdot Mirror
People who view themselves as do-gooders and take so much pride in their righteousness scare me. If history has taught us anything, generally people who think they have a monopoly on good tend to end up doing bad.
All the problems with windows on a really expensive machine. Great! I'm failing to see the benefit here.
[The RupertZone]
To openly declare that intelligent design is not even possible is decidely unscientific. That is all.
Ok. I get you now. I thought you were suggesting, very literally, that employees only take home minimum wage plus "typical" bonus. You're simply talking about a model that we aren't all used to.
And... uh... do you by any chance know me??? (Chicagoland, salary in the post. interesting...)
I'm really confused. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt here: You say IT people should have a good attitude about working for you for minimum wage? Am I missing something?
Do YOU work for minimum wage?
You're right, you wouldn't hire me, because I wouldn't work for minimum wage. I'd sooner get a job at Jiffy Lube. But, so far, I've been able to keep jobs that pay me very well for my skills. My boss appreciates my skills, thank goodness.
Nevermind the fact that all your employees are probably frustrated that you are busy trying see how much work you can squeeze out of them for how little money. You don't sound like the kind of person I would work very hard for.
Nobody is forcing you to have cable service. It costs a lot, I know, buy you can live without it. Man, you people have some real sense of entitlement, don't you?
The TV stations are going to have to do something, and if TIVO can integrate ads the way Google/Yahoo have, maybe it will work. Those shows we love to watch--they aren't free, ya know. Advertisers don't like paying big $$$ for an ad that will just get fast forwarded through.
This made my eyes go crossed. Why would the GD do this?
[FTM]
Some wood, screws and a crappy desk? This is a slashdot story?
"Does it bother you that churches have a Mission Statement touting their Core Values?" No, it doesn't. Why? Should it?
It was the least he could do, after stealing Harrison's wife.... :-)
Wow. So its Bush's fault? You're nuts.
"This is only the begining of Linux of the desktop."
Yawn. I've been hearing this since 1998 as well. It hasn't happened. Love or hate Microsoft, its not going away.
My point was that I've been reading since 1998 now on slashdot that MS is doing horrible, losing share to open source and going to go bankrupt in "just a few more years."
But Microsoft seems as strong as ever. Firefox is making minimal dents in IE and Linux has made no dent in Windows to speak up. They serve different purposes and markets. No matter how much Slashdotters long for the demis of MS, it doesn't seem to be happening.
The truth is MS users will wait that long. They don't have a choice and MOST users (not slashdot types) don't care what OS they use, they just want their computer to work. They don't know about the details at the level that we here do. MS isn't going to lose anything, they are simply to strong and ingrained in the market. Its the truth...
"Anyone could predict that microsoft is currently vulnerable. They are losing their sustainable competative advantage and losing their market domination cannot be too far off."
U, really? This doesn't seem to be the truth. I know you probably don't like MS, but spewing lies doesn't change anything.
I'll take it--and I hope he's right. There are many MS cynics here. This comment will either bite Bill or lead to great things for Microsoft. So be it. Why be angry?
Fix what? Remove the freedom of speech that says "there are alternative theories to evolution"?
The heart of this debate is not whether or not you believe in evolution, its how it should be taught--as theory or fact? Do parents have rights to tell their kids that they don't believe the science book? Do kids have the right to know that not everyone subscribes to evolution?
Stick to the debate at hand-don't go off on a tangent because of your distaste for religion.
I have--many. Please don't sit in judgement because you disagree with me.
Tell me, what do you think is wrong with the stickers that are at the heart of this debate?
From The Morning
Ok, I'll give you that, but the heart of this debate is still the same: should kids be taught that evolution is fact or theory? Should they be made aware that not all believe it or subscribe to it? Is this okay?
The zealousness that leads to evoltion being forced from schools is the same kind of zealousness that the evolutionists are using to present their theory as the only viable one. What is the fear of these simple little stickers? I don't get it!
Why attack me personally? The point I was trying to make is that evolution should be taught as it as--as a theory.
You might be surprised to know that I, a Christian, think evolution SHOULD be taught in school---as a theory, which it is. Don't try to tell the kids its a proven fact. Allow this debate to happen and allow kids to participate in it.
The stickers in text books were only an attempt to make it known that there are alternative views to evolution. Why do you have a problem with this? Why do you say that I am crazy? Do you know me?
Once again, you are changing the debate. Should evolution be taught as fact or theory? What say to parents have in the matter? Any?
I'm not arguing for or against evolution, but you can't teach things as fact unless they are indeed facts. The verdict is still out on evolution. This is all I am trying to say.
We can agree to disagree about my religion and faith, and we're not debating that. We're debating education. Teach evolution-I'm all for that-but teach it as it is-as a theory.
Where is the fossil record the the "partial wing"--the one that was growing but had yet to produce results? Where is the fossil record for the partial gil--the gil that didn't yet breath but was existing in order that some relatives would grow one that did work?
The fossil record is incomplete. Mutations NEVER result in good changes in the near generation, and therefor the extended generation. So evolution remains only a fallible theory.
I could go into all the times I've witnessed God, but you wouldn't believe me, so why bother.
From the Morning
Again, you are changing the argument. Is evolution fact or theory? Answer the question.