If one works hard, is honest and never stops learning, one can end up in IT, with a decent wage. But it does require SOME effort, and not quitting... EVER.
Wow, talk about misleading. Great economic plan, genius. We'll just put everyone in IT!
But in actuality, one has to have both intelligence and luck to have a good career. In an information economy, "hard work" doesn't mean shit. It's smart work that makes a difference. "Hard work" was a good value for an agrarian economy, and maybe an early industrial economy. It is an outdated concept today.
Having a passion for learning, creativity, and a willingness to take risks will take you MUCH further than "hard work."
the gap is widening. If it continues, we will reach a point where the majority of the country is unable to afford the necessities of life
Is that statement (income disparity => inability to afford necessities) based on some wacky new economic theory? It sounds like bunk, to me. The fact that Bill Gates has more money than God doesn't prevent me from buying food or hiring the services of a physician. He can only consume so much of the "basic necessities of life."
Bad advice. People who don't use credit cards are just throwing money away. Cash-back cards give you 5% back on groceries and gas. If you don't make much, that 5% is a significant portion of your income!
Good advice would be "Always use cash-back credit cards and always pay in full."
Additionally, it is much easier to analyze your personal spending habits if you always use the same credit card because the CC companies send out these neat booklets that show breakdowns of your spending ("you spent 16% of your money on groceries in 2006").
And another point: If you only carry a card (and no cash) you will never run the risk of losing serious money from theft/mugging.
"Never use credit cards" is only good advice for seriously irresponsible people. And they tend to have bigger problems.
I lived on less than $10k/year for several years in college. I also used a credit card throughout, and never paid a single fee or finance charge. So don't say I wouldn't understand--I've been there.
Does the word "believe" even enter in to it? There are many reasons people are poor (or rich). Most broadly, it is a combination of nature, nurture, and luck.
If you have the stupid gene, you will probably be poor. If a culture of laziness was imprinted on you by your parents/culture, you will be poor. If you weren't given the option to succeed in school or career training because of family reasons, you will be poor.
Even the snottiest of white-collar blow-hards will admit that he will resort to violence if placed in a desperate situation. He will also admit that poverty places people in desperate situations.
The real contentious question is whether the poor who become violent should be blamed or sympathized toward--or some combination.
That's not the case. If your emerge happens to update Samba to a version with a new config file format, you had better update your config file RIGHT AWAY, lest you be left with a broken computer as soon as the service restarts. This problem never comes up with a computer that has a fixed release schedule.
It isn't really the fault of any tool (emerge, apt, or yum). It is a result of the package release policies of the distros. In RedHat, Debian, or Ubuntu, you can do an update every day but never have to worry about a changing config file. You only have to worry about config file changes when you do a major upgrade.
With Gentoo, they release packages the second they are ready, instead of waiting for OS releases. You could end up doing config work every week with Gentoo that you only need to do twice a year with other distros.
If you had actually made use of your Gentoo install, you would have many customized config files, and you would have realized how difficult and time consuming it is to keep things up-to-date.
I have used every distro, and used Gentoo as my primary desktop OS for over 1 year. It was a wonderful learning tool, but once I realized how much time I spent administering things, I switched to Ubuntu. Gentoo really should ONLY be used by people who are dedicated, motivated, and have plenty of free time.
Have you used Gentoo? Emerge is much harder than apt because gentoo packages come with new configuration files for the same release levels! You must choose to either keep, overwrite, or manually edit new config files when you emerge. Debian/Ubuntu don't do this because they don't change config file versions unless you upgrade to a new major release of the OS.
he didn't know much about Linux... His requirements -- Install a distribution which is easy to maintain... Gentoo
My brain exploded when I read that. This author is WAY out of touch with reality. Of all the widely-used Linux distros, Gentoo, by FAR, requires the most administration effort and expertise.
Gentoo is for people who want the very latest in technology and the highest possible customization ability, but don't mind manually rewriting config files every week when a new version of a given package is released. Clearly, the author of this article is not qualified to--actually, no, he's just on crack.
My QM in college went about as far as "calculate the frequency of a bowling ball of mass m." I had never heard of the "grating test" for determining if a quantum state is collapsed. Do you have a reference on this? My understanding was that light speed is the limit on the speed of information transfer in the universe.
I would be willing to bring this question before some contacts I still have at school if you could point me to a reference to the grating test.
No, I was asking about reality. So I am going for things like extreme gravity, singularities, maybe even string theory interdimensionality. And no, it wasn't a joke question. The smartass who modded it funny has an unsophisticated grasp on physics.
Could you list any of the current areas of research which may some day allow for information transmission faster than c? Let's keep in reasonable: only mention theories we may be able to explore within the next 1000 years.
Your thought process makes about as much sense as deciding a radio is "crap" because there was a bad song playing on the station the knob happened to be turned to when you bought it.
So no, you aren't qualified to have an opinion on something with which you have nearly no experience. Someone who never learned how to turn the knob should not be writing reviews of radios.
For you to take that position against embryonic stem cell research, but not to take that position against fertility clinics in general, is blatant hypocrisy.
You aren't qualified to speak about this because you fundamentally don't understand how the music works, and you don't know what the phrase "begs the question" means.
Also, if you crank up the video settings past the default, they actually look pretty good on a 7900GS. Of course, because users get to create their own objects, you will get boring-looking stuff if the person who made it has no skill.
People should vote based on reality. Reality is determined using emperical evidence.
I hope you never are given the respnsibility for a person with serious mental illness. It sounds like you would worsen their disease by refusing to point out reality from delusion.
When I tell you there is no evidence of gods or magic, I do it with the same motivation I use when telling my grandmother (who has alzheimer's) that Nixon isn't president. I want to help her hold on to reality for her own good and for the good of the democracy she helps control.
But I'm glad I got to reinforce your prejudices. You should take it a step further: atheists are the devil! I've heard that one from many a Christian. That makes it even easier for you to dismiss people without even considering their message.
You will find, I think, that this story will leave the front page soon, and won't face the full wrath of moderators.
Also, I have more karma than you can possibly imagine; I don't give a ship if I get modded down. It's sort of like the movie "Groundhog Day" these days on Slashdot.
You seem to have fallen in to the mind-trap that criticizing religious claims is somehow hateful or intolerant, while criticizing any other claim is OK. THAT, my friend, is intolerance.
No scientifically-minded person can, in good conscience, tolerate completely-unsubstantiated theories being stated confidently as fact. If you have no evidence, call it theory or speculation--or I won't tolerate it.
Why are athiests so angry and intolerant, especially at the mere mention of religion? Maybe they're missing something.
Why are you so intolerant toward my belief that you are made of magical cheese? Sure, there is no scientific evidence that you are made of cheese, but science doesn't enter in to it because it's magical. My guess is that most atheists are angry because magic-believers are voting based on their completely unsubstantiated delusions. Atheists are no more intolerant than you are. Do you refer to people in asylums as "insane"? If you do, you are intolerant of their beliefs.
If every pulsar has a distinct period, how could you ever get confused which is which? Couldn't you always be able to determine this based on their periods?/forgive me if i'm missing something fundamental. it's fri night and i'm a bit lit
There are still people like you? Sometimes, the first idea is a bad idea. When a better one comes along, people switch.
If you have only ever worked entirely in the IT industry, you might not see the point. If you have done cross-disciplinary work, you will realize that redefining common binary prefixes in one field but not another leads to confusion and ambiguity where those fields combine.
Sure. You can always refine a model until you arrive at, well, the raw data you are modeling.
SKs and BHs are the people who do damage with vulnerability knowledge (VK). There are basically two cases when a researcher is considering publication. 1) the researcher is the first to discover the VK. 2) a small number of BHs already have the VK.
For #1, practicing full disclosure does a lot of damage, no question. For #2, practicing full disclosure may decrease the time to patch (giving the small number of BHs slightly more time to do damage), but at the expense of causing many many (many) more BHs to have the VK, and all of the SKs to have the VK (which has a HUGE damage potential).
Full disclosure clearly increases damage in #1. We can't know how often #2 is the case. But for the vast majority of cases I can conceive, full disclosure greatly increases damage (vs. responsible disclosure) in case #2.
The model still holds, I think. And it demonstrates that responsible disclosure causes less damage overall.
Responsible disclosure, as defined in the industry, gives the researcher the moral responsibility to afford a vendor a reasonable amount of time to fix a flaw before releasing the research publicly.
Yes the window works both ways. That is why the word "reasonable" is used. Two months is considered reasonable for most types of software. And don't even try to condescend. This conversation has provided me with no insight. I make a career of this stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, talk about misleading. Great economic plan, genius. We'll just put everyone in IT!
But in actuality, one has to have both intelligence and luck to have a good career. In an information economy, "hard work" doesn't mean shit. It's smart work that makes a difference. "Hard work" was a good value for an agrarian economy, and maybe an early industrial economy. It is an outdated concept today.
Having a passion for learning, creativity, and a willingness to take risks will take you MUCH further than "hard work."
Is that statement (income disparity => inability to afford necessities) based on some wacky new economic theory? It sounds like bunk, to me. The fact that Bill Gates has more money than God doesn't prevent me from buying food or hiring the services of a physician. He can only consume so much of the "basic necessities of life."
Bad advice. People who don't use credit cards are just throwing money away. Cash-back cards give you 5% back on groceries and gas. If you don't make much, that 5% is a significant portion of your income!
Good advice would be "Always use cash-back credit cards and always pay in full."
Additionally, it is much easier to analyze your personal spending habits if you always use the same credit card because the CC companies send out these neat booklets that show breakdowns of your spending ("you spent 16% of your money on groceries in 2006").
And another point: If you only carry a card (and no cash) you will never run the risk of losing serious money from theft/mugging.
"Never use credit cards" is only good advice for seriously irresponsible people. And they tend to have bigger problems.
I lived on less than $10k/year for several years in college. I also used a credit card throughout, and never paid a single fee or finance charge. So don't say I wouldn't understand--I've been there.
Does the word "believe" even enter in to it? There are many reasons people are poor (or rich). Most broadly, it is a combination of nature, nurture, and luck.
If you have the stupid gene, you will probably be poor. If a culture of laziness was imprinted on you by your parents/culture, you will be poor. If you weren't given the option to succeed in school or career training because of family reasons, you will be poor.
Even the snottiest of white-collar blow-hards will admit that he will resort to violence if placed in a desperate situation. He will also admit that poverty places people in desperate situations.
The real contentious question is whether the poor who become violent should be blamed or sympathized toward--or some combination.
That's not the case. If your emerge happens to update Samba to a version with a new config file format, you had better update your config file RIGHT AWAY, lest you be left with a broken computer as soon as the service restarts. This problem never comes up with a computer that has a fixed release schedule.
It isn't really the fault of any tool (emerge, apt, or yum). It is a result of the package release policies of the distros. In RedHat, Debian, or Ubuntu, you can do an update every day but never have to worry about a changing config file. You only have to worry about config file changes when you do a major upgrade.
With Gentoo, they release packages the second they are ready, instead of waiting for OS releases. You could end up doing config work every week with Gentoo that you only need to do twice a year with other distros.
If you had actually made use of your Gentoo install, you would have many customized config files, and you would have realized how difficult and time consuming it is to keep things up-to-date.
I have used every distro, and used Gentoo as my primary desktop OS for over 1 year. It was a wonderful learning tool, but once I realized how much time I spent administering things, I switched to Ubuntu. Gentoo really should ONLY be used by people who are dedicated, motivated, and have plenty of free time.
Have you used Gentoo? Emerge is much harder than apt because gentoo packages come with new configuration files for the same release levels! You must choose to either keep, overwrite, or manually edit new config files when you emerge. Debian/Ubuntu don't do this because they don't change config file versions unless you upgrade to a new major release of the OS.
My brain exploded when I read that. This author is WAY out of touch with reality. Of all the widely-used Linux distros, Gentoo, by FAR, requires the most administration effort and expertise.
Gentoo is for people who want the very latest in technology and the highest possible customization ability, but don't mind manually rewriting config files every week when a new version of a given package is released. Clearly, the author of this article is not qualified to--actually, no, he's just on crack.
My QM in college went about as far as "calculate the frequency of a bowling ball of mass m." I had never heard of the "grating test" for determining if a quantum state is collapsed. Do you have a reference on this? My understanding was that light speed is the limit on the speed of information transfer in the universe.
I would be willing to bring this question before some contacts I still have at school if you could point me to a reference to the grating test.
If that is true, then it is possible to transmit information in binary (0=not collapsed, 1=collapsed) form without the lightspeed limitation.
Which makes me suspect you misunderstand something.
No, I was asking about reality. So I am going for things like extreme gravity, singularities, maybe even string theory interdimensionality. And no, it wasn't a joke question. The smartass who modded it funny has an unsophisticated grasp on physics.
Could you list any of the current areas of research which may some day allow for information transmission faster than c? Let's keep in reasonable: only mention theories we may be able to explore within the next 1000 years.
Your thought process makes about as much sense as deciding a radio is "crap" because there was a bad song playing on the station the knob happened to be turned to when you bought it.
So no, you aren't qualified to have an opinion on something with which you have nearly no experience. Someone who never learned how to turn the knob should not be writing reviews of radios.
For you to take that position against embryonic stem cell research, but not to take that position against fertility clinics in general, is blatant hypocrisy.
You aren't qualified to speak about this because you fundamentally don't understand how the music works, and you don't know what the phrase "begs the question" means.
Also, if you crank up the video settings past the default, they actually look pretty good on a 7900GS. Of course, because users get to create their own objects, you will get boring-looking stuff if the person who made it has no skill.
I just wanted to gloat that I actually got modded up. It may be, in part, due to your prediction that I would be modded down. Thanks for that :-)
People should vote based on reality. Reality is determined using emperical evidence.
I hope you never are given the respnsibility for a person with serious mental illness. It sounds like you would worsen their disease by refusing to point out reality from delusion.
When I tell you there is no evidence of gods or magic, I do it with the same motivation I use when telling my grandmother (who has alzheimer's) that Nixon isn't president. I want to help her hold on to reality for her own good and for the good of the democracy she helps control.
But I'm glad I got to reinforce your prejudices. You should take it a step further: atheists are the devil! I've heard that one from many a Christian. That makes it even easier for you to dismiss people without even considering their message.
You will find, I think, that this story will leave the front page soon, and won't face the full wrath of moderators.
Also, I have more karma than you can possibly imagine; I don't give a ship if I get modded down. It's sort of like the movie "Groundhog Day" these days on Slashdot.
You seem to have fallen in to the mind-trap that criticizing religious claims is somehow hateful or intolerant, while criticizing any other claim is OK. THAT, my friend, is intolerance.
No scientifically-minded person can, in good conscience, tolerate completely-unsubstantiated theories being stated confidently as fact. If you have no evidence, call it theory or speculation--or I won't tolerate it.
Which is more likely: That all "greifer's" mothers don't love them, or that you have absolutely no sense of humor?
What, exactly, do you think "WIKI" is an acronym for?
Why are you so intolerant toward my belief that you are made of magical cheese? Sure, there is no scientific evidence that you are made of cheese, but science doesn't enter in to it because it's magical.
My guess is that most atheists are angry because magic-believers are voting based on their completely unsubstantiated delusions.
Atheists are no more intolerant than you are. Do you refer to people in asylums as "insane"? If you do, you are intolerant of their beliefs.
If every pulsar has a distinct period, how could you ever get confused which is which? Couldn't you always be able to determine this based on their periods? /forgive me if i'm missing something fundamental. it's fri night and i'm a bit lit
There are still people like you? Sometimes, the first idea is a bad idea. When a better one comes along, people switch.
If you have only ever worked entirely in the IT industry, you might not see the point. If you have done cross-disciplinary work, you will realize that redefining common binary prefixes in one field but not another leads to confusion and ambiguity where those fields combine.
Sure. You can always refine a model until you arrive at, well, the raw data you are modeling.
SKs and BHs are the people who do damage with vulnerability knowledge (VK). There are basically two cases when a researcher is considering publication.
1) the researcher is the first to discover the VK.
2) a small number of BHs already have the VK.
For #1, practicing full disclosure does a lot of damage, no question.
For #2, practicing full disclosure may decrease the time to patch (giving the small number of BHs slightly more time to do damage), but at the expense of causing many many (many) more BHs to have the VK, and all of the SKs to have the VK (which has a HUGE damage potential).
Full disclosure clearly increases damage in #1. We can't know how often #2 is the case. But for the vast majority of cases I can conceive, full disclosure greatly increases damage (vs. responsible disclosure) in case #2.
The model still holds, I think. And it demonstrates that responsible disclosure causes less damage overall.
Responsible disclosure, as defined in the industry, gives the researcher the moral responsibility to afford a vendor a reasonable amount of time to fix a flaw before releasing the research publicly.
Yes the window works both ways. That is why the word "reasonable" is used. Two months is considered reasonable for most types of software. And don't even try to condescend. This conversation has provided me with no insight. I make a career of this stuff.