The problem with allowing the kind of UI altering extensions that Firefox does is that it's an insane security risk and a massive performance issue.
The only reason I still use Firefox is the UI altering extensions that make it look and work like Firefox did the better part of two decades ago. I despise the modern UI and have no use for a version of firefox that requires it.
Each user uses a different handful. That handful makes it worth sticking with Firefox in a Chrome world. Remove the handful and... no more Firefox users.
As for me, I use Classic Theme Restorer because I like how Firefox used to look and work. Even though firefox freezes on me daily, I continue to use it because with Classic Theme Restorer it looks and acts like I want. When that's no longer the case, I'll have no further reason to put up with Firefox's flaws. The end.
When you ask which aspect, I'll ask you to pick your favorite and dive deep. If you answer "42" first, I'll recognize that you have a good sense of humor that'll make a positive impact on the working environment. And if ultimately you can do half a year of university-level lecturing, I'll figure that out within about 5 minutes of answer.
I want to hire people who enjoy sharing their knowledge. I want folks who in spite of their brilliance won't leave me in a lurch where no one else on the team understands their work well enough to maintain it. Your particular manner of self-selection helps me greatly.
If you were interviewing for a Linux or Unix job, I'd also ask you to name the 12 Unix file permission bits. It's not an insult, it's a weed-out. A shocking number of alleged Linux sysadmins use chmod by rote, without understanding what's really happening.
Correct, getaddrinfo() asked the -host's- naming service to resolve a name and the resolution isn't necessarily from the DNS. And if you were interviewing with me, you'd be well on your way to passing the weedout by demonstrating a depth of knowledge.
One of those three things you listed is different from the others. That forms the followup question I'd ask you.
If you're a specialist, I want to hear about the details which cross your specialty. Don't know networks? That's fine. Can you tell me about how the returned html is parsed? Composited in to what the user sees? Do you know Big Data where you can tell me about how the Google search works on the servers?
No details in any of the specialties = no depth = no job offer.
I don't need you to have the multiple-hour answer. I need you to have 5 or 10 minutes of it. Any pieces of it that add up to 5 or 10 minutes. If you don't have that, you don't have depth in any specializations. If you don't have depth then you're the guy I can replace with a shell script.
I would love to hear all about that. The beauty of the question is that it crosses half the knowledge domains of computing, so you don't have to know any particular one to offer a successful answer, you just have to know -something-.
I'm currently hiring for Linux & Windows sysadmin/Devops folks and Java developers in Virginia. Yes, you can contact me with a resume.
I have a core question I ask all candidates: You (candidate) open up your preferred web browser, type "www.google.com" in the location bar and press enter. In as much detail as you can, tell me what happens next under the hood. What does the browser software do? The OS? Packets on the network and the switches and routers they transit? What servers are contacted and how do they do what do they do? Go in to as much depth, detail and specificity as you can.
The common answer is: "It connects to the Google server and gets the web page." The 80th percentile answer is, "It gets the IP address from the DNS server and then connects to the Google server."
Folks, that question has a multiple hour answer if you're enough of a guru to give it. The common answers do not demonstrate a sufficient understanding of how your computer works to land you a job in the tech industry.
With more reviews, the buyer has a better idea -exactly- what's bad about the product thus has a better chance of making an educated decision about buying it.
The article and study are examples of misusing statistics. The correlation between number of reviews and purchases niether tests nor demonstrates a causal relationship from the former to the latter, and even if it did it does not demonstrate the -claimed- causal relatinoship.
Computer monitors tend to be (A) smaller, (B) faster 50ms) and (C) much more expensive than a common television with the same resolution. So no, he's looking for a nice large television at a television price and speed without the "smart" features.
Billions of instructions per second. Face recognition in millionths of a second. So they're going to accurately recognize a face running only a few thousand CPU instructions? Baloney.
he is saying that there are a percentage of Google's female employees who shouldn't have been hired for those positions.
Nowhere in the memo does he make that case. Instead he makes the case that the male/female ratio at Google is correct -because- Google hired only the women who were qualified.
Funny, I just read the entire memo and I can't find a single place where he so much as implied that any of his female colleagues were unworthy.
I did, however, see this sentence: "Many of these differences are small and there's significant overlap between men and women, so you can't say anything about an individual given these population level distributions."
Before Clinton converted it in to a "laptops for schools" program, the Universal Service Fund was used to fund telephone lines in rural America where the cost was too high. It worked: telephones became ubiquitous. The Universal Service Fund should be restored to its original purpose with the simple tweak: fund the initial builds for broadband Internet access in rural America.
You've assumed it's a professional electrician's installation in the walls. Most ad-hoc coax installations I've seen (especially the runs done by cable TV installers) have cable jutting out of the floor or wall wherever the hole was drilled. If you can't hide it behind furniture, it looks terrible.
Well, that's a difference between you and I. I believe in liberty, which means I disagree with using compulsion for the sake of your, or my or anybody else's notion of the greater good.
Where failure to take a vaccine makes you a bio weapon complicit in mass murder, I'm okay with restricting your choice. Everywhere else, it is and should be your choice. Just as it's your choice to engage or not in sexual activity without checking your partner's medical situation.
This is fallout from overly aggressive vaccination efforts. When we mandate vaccination for things that don't have a high death rate and aren't contagious through air and touch, we lose the moral authority to resist the bajillion claims for exemption.
Measles is deadly and highly contagious. The measles vaccine should be mandatory barring medical exemption. But because we also screw around with trying to make STD vaccines (like HPV) mandatory we open the door to refusal of all vaccines on the flimsiest of excuses.
Slashdot Mirror
If you have "heightened security concerns," what on earth are you doing using a public webmail product?
The problem with allowing the kind of UI altering extensions that Firefox does is that it's an insane security risk and a massive performance issue.
The only reason I still use Firefox is the UI altering extensions that make it look and work like Firefox did the better part of two decades ago. I despise the modern UI and have no use for a version of firefox that requires it.
Depends on the character of the failure. Some jet plane failures are survivable. Some are not. Why would hyperloop be any different?
Each user uses a different handful. That handful makes it worth sticking with Firefox in a Chrome world. Remove the handful and... no more Firefox users.
As for me, I use Classic Theme Restorer because I like how Firefox used to look and work. Even though firefox freezes on me daily, I continue to use it because with Classic Theme Restorer it looks and acts like I want. When that's no longer the case, I'll have no further reason to put up with Firefox's flaws. The end.
When you ask which aspect, I'll ask you to pick your favorite and dive deep. If you answer "42" first, I'll recognize that you have a good sense of humor that'll make a positive impact on the working environment. And if ultimately you can do half a year of university-level lecturing, I'll figure that out within about 5 minutes of answer.
See how that works?
I want to hire people who enjoy sharing their knowledge. I want folks who in spite of their brilliance won't leave me in a lurch where no one else on the team understands their work well enough to maintain it. Your particular manner of self-selection helps me greatly.
If you were interviewing for a Linux or Unix job, I'd also ask you to name the 12 Unix file permission bits. It's not an insult, it's a weed-out. A shocking number of alleged Linux sysadmins use chmod by rote, without understanding what's really happening.
Correct, getaddrinfo() asked the -host's- naming service to resolve a name and the resolution isn't necessarily from the DNS. And if you were interviewing with me, you'd be well on your way to passing the weedout by demonstrating a depth of knowledge.
One of those three things you listed is different from the others. That forms the followup question I'd ask you.
If you're a specialist, I want to hear about the details which cross your specialty. Don't know networks? That's fine. Can you tell me about how the returned html is parsed? Composited in to what the user sees? Do you know Big Data where you can tell me about how the Google search works on the servers?
No details in any of the specialties = no depth = no job offer.
I don't need you to have the multiple-hour answer. I need you to have 5 or 10 minutes of it. Any pieces of it that add up to 5 or 10 minutes. If you don't have that, you don't have depth in any specializations. If you don't have depth then you're the guy I can replace with a shell script.
I would love to hear all about that. The beauty of the question is that it crosses half the knowledge domains of computing, so you don't have to know any particular one to offer a successful answer, you just have to know -something-.
I'm currently hiring for Linux & Windows sysadmin/Devops folks and Java developers in Virginia. Yes, you can contact me with a resume.
I have a core question I ask all candidates: You (candidate) open up your preferred web browser, type "www.google.com" in the location bar and press enter. In as much detail as you can, tell me what happens next under the hood. What does the browser software do? The OS? Packets on the network and the switches and routers they transit? What servers are contacted and how do they do what do they do? Go in to as much depth, detail and specificity as you can.
The common answer is: "It connects to the Google server and gets the web page." The 80th percentile answer is, "It gets the IP address from the DNS server and then connects to the Google server."
Folks, that question has a multiple hour answer if you're enough of a guru to give it. The common answers do not demonstrate a sufficient understanding of how your computer works to land you a job in the tech industry.
The researchers claim that "the devil you know" is a logical fallacy. It isn't.
The three main kinds of mistruth.
With more reviews, the buyer has a better idea -exactly- what's bad about the product thus has a better chance of making an educated decision about buying it.
The article and study are examples of misusing statistics. The correlation between number of reviews and purchases niether tests nor demonstrates a causal relationship from the former to the latter, and even if it did it does not demonstrate the -claimed- causal relatinoship.
Slashdot and it's HTML interpretation despite being set to plain text. That was supposed to be < 10ms and > 50ms.
Computer monitors tend to be (A) smaller, (B) faster 50ms) and (C) much more expensive than a common television with the same resolution. So no, he's looking for a nice large television at a television price and speed without the "smart" features.
Billions of instructions per second. Face recognition in millionths of a second. So they're going to accurately recognize a face running only a few thousand CPU instructions? Baloney.
Or free day care for employee's children. Point taken.
he is saying that there are a percentage of Google's female employees who shouldn't have been hired for those positions.
Nowhere in the memo does he make that case. Instead he makes the case that the male/female ratio at Google is correct -because- Google hired only the women who were qualified.
Funny, I just read the entire memo and I can't find a single place where he so much as implied that any of his female colleagues were unworthy.
I did, however, see this sentence: "Many of these differences are small and there's significant overlap between men and women, so you can't say anything
about an individual given these population level distributions."
Trade liberty for security then you deserve neither? If that makes me an asshole, I embrace it.
Before Clinton converted it in to a "laptops for schools" program, the Universal Service Fund was used to fund telephone lines in rural America where the cost was too high. It worked: telephones became ubiquitous. The Universal Service Fund should be restored to its original purpose with the simple tweak: fund the initial builds for broadband Internet access in rural America.
You've assumed it's a professional electrician's installation in the walls. Most ad-hoc coax installations I've seen (especially the runs done by cable TV installers) have cable jutting out of the floor or wall wherever the hole was drilled. If you can't hide it behind furniture, it looks terrible.
Well, that's a difference between you and I. I believe in liberty, which means I disagree with using compulsion for the sake of your, or my or anybody else's notion of the greater good.
Where failure to take a vaccine makes you a bio weapon complicit in mass murder, I'm okay with restricting your choice. Everywhere else, it is and should be your choice. Just as it's your choice to engage or not in sexual activity without checking your partner's medical situation.
This is fallout from overly aggressive vaccination efforts. When we mandate vaccination for things that don't have a high death rate and aren't contagious through air and touch, we lose the moral authority to resist the bajillion claims for exemption.
Measles is deadly and highly contagious. The measles vaccine should be mandatory barring medical exemption. But because we also screw around with trying to make STD vaccines (like HPV) mandatory we open the door to refusal of all vaccines on the flimsiest of excuses.
Paying for things online is perfectly safe. Any reversible transaction is safe for the payer.
Receiving payments online is much less safe. Transactions without effective non-repudiation offer risk for the seller.