Most of us are not keeping the "fruits of our labor" tucked into our mattresses. Experience has taught us that "mattresses" burn quite easily and they do not provide a significant barrier to oportunistic thievery. Thus, we put our trust in select others to store and protect the products of our toil. Though we are providing these select others the opportunity for misuse of the "fruits of our labor", this is preferable to the quite likely event that we experience total loss of this fruit.
In summary:
Friday && paycheck && cash in hand == Monday && penury.
||
Friday && paycheck && cash in bank == Monday && solvency.
reference: any late 20th century or newer intro to biology text.
Overrepresentations lead to stereotyping
on
A Profile of Coders
·
· Score: 1
Of course, the "pathetic nerd" stereotype of coders is not true in all cases. But, "pathetic nerds" are overrepresented in coding jobs. For the sake of discussion let's assume that the "pathetic nerd" represents 1% of the general population. If the "coding population" is 5% "pathetic nerds" then that population will be stereotyped as "a bunch of pathetic nerds."
For example, some "safe" stereotypes: ugly-American red-headed Irishman unethical politician
"... when I fix a Linux problem, I generally feel pretty satisfied, as it turns out I was doing something wrong and I now understand what it was and how to do it right. When I fix a windows problem, I am typically just pissed off, because it "magically" went away... "
Try programming without thinking of semantics. I suppose you can if you use a "graphical" development tool - but I don't believe such things are popular in this forum. It seems "semantics" are much more popular - we don't say "my computer" here; we say "my xyz o/s running on abc hardware."
Could this be the beginning of the end of the MCSE? My gut reaction has always been, that I will live to see the day when hordes of MCSE's suddenly find that their services are no longer needed. Easy come; easy go.
It seems much software is being developed using investors' money. Perhaps this situation parallels the "savings and loan crisis" of the 1980's: A suave CEO schmoozes some financial backing for (fill in the blank) project, pays himself and his buddies fat salaries for a while, and then, suddenly, the development corporation is bankrupt. Ergo, negative profits.
as are most (religious) human beings. He is scientific when science agrees with his beliefs. When science does not support his beliefs, he tends to ignore the science or he expects an excessive burden of proof from science.
U.S. citizens are guaranteed Freedom of Speech and of the Press. Our Constitution protects its "subjects" from both the tyranny of the minority (e.g. a king) and from the tyranny of the majority (e.g. whatever the "mob" is after - witches, racists, communists, militant christians,...).
One thing the Constitution does not guarantee is "anonymity." So, if someone wishes to print or speak "dangerous" language, then they become a target for law enforcement agencies without damaging anyone's constitutional rights.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of us are not keeping the "fruits of our labor" tucked into our mattresses. Experience has taught us that "mattresses" burn quite easily and they do not provide a significant barrier to oportunistic thievery. Thus, we put our trust in select others to store and protect the products of our toil. Though we are providing these select others the opportunity for misuse of the "fruits of our labor", this is preferable to the quite likely event that we experience total loss of this fruit.
In summary:
Friday && paycheck && cash in hand == Monday && penury.
||
Friday && paycheck && cash in bank == Monday && solvency.
reference: any late 20th century or newer intro to biology text.
Of course, the "pathetic nerd" stereotype of coders is not true in all cases. But, "pathetic nerds" are overrepresented in coding jobs. For the sake of discussion let's assume that the "pathetic nerd" represents 1% of the general population. If the "coding population" is 5% "pathetic nerds" then that population will be stereotyped as "a bunch of pathetic nerds."
For example, some "safe" stereotypes:
ugly-American
red-headed Irishman
unethical politician
" ... when I fix a Linux problem, I generally feel pretty satisfied, as it turns out I was doing something wrong and I now understand what it was and how to do it right. When I fix a windows problem, I am typically just pissed off, because it "magically" went away ... "
.
Try programming without thinking of semantics. I suppose you can if you use a "graphical" development tool - but I don't believe such things are popular in this forum. It seems "semantics" are much more popular - we don't say "my computer" here; we say "my xyz o/s running on abc hardware."
I agree and also I feel your response should be "up-moderated."
Could this be the beginning of the end of the MCSE? My gut reaction has always been, that I will live to see the day when hordes of MCSE's suddenly find that their services are no longer needed. Easy come; easy go.
It seems much software is being developed using investors' money. Perhaps this situation parallels the "savings and loan crisis" of the 1980's: A suave CEO schmoozes some financial backing for (fill in the blank) project, pays himself and his buddies fat salaries for a while, and then, suddenly, the development corporation is bankrupt. Ergo, negative profits.
you're part of the problem.
...
Anyone who feels comfortable in "age discrimintation" now is contributing to an overall acceptance of this practice.
Do not ask for whom the bell tolls
as are most (religious) human beings. He is scientific when science agrees with his beliefs. When science does not support his beliefs, he tends to ignore the science or he expects an excessive burden of proof from science.
So, it isn't just me; Al Gore "is" a robot. Well, that explains everything.
...
U.S. citizens are guaranteed Freedom of Speech and of the Press. Our Constitution protects its "subjects" from both the tyranny of the minority (e.g. a king) and from the tyranny of the majority (e.g. whatever the "mob" is after - witches, racists, communists, militant christians,...).
One thing the Constitution does not guarantee is "anonymity." So, if someone wishes to print or speak "dangerous" language, then they become a target for law enforcement agencies without damaging anyone's constitutional rights.