Those shackles are nothing more than a tool, yes. And I'm not going to get paranoid over the invention of shackles. I will get annoyed if you put them on peoples' legs unfairly, though. But, if you don't, I don't care whether they exist one way or another.
With all of the technophobia that we have bashed over the years, you would think that we slashdotters would be immune to this sort of paranoia. But whenever a government agency gets new technology, we go crazy with the possibilities of what the could do with it, whether they're actually doing it or not. Isn't that the same reaction our bosses have when they realize that we know more about the company's systems than they do?
It's all paranoia, if you ask me. It's a tool, folks. Nothing else.
Rob
Re:I just have bits 'n' pieces
on
High Tech Junk
·
· Score: 1
I could pick up several cases from friends, but none of them have power supplies. See, all of my friends are like me -- they don't replace their case until the power supply dies. I know one guy who's running a K6 in an original AT case. He had to replace the power supply once, but that's about it.
Rob
Re:I just have bits 'n' pieces
on
High Tech Junk
·
· Score: 1
I could find a LOT of uses for a 486. Heck, it'll even run Windows NT (barely).
I don't have any complete systems laying around. All I have is parts. The last complete system I bought was back in '93, and I've just been upgradig since then. So now I have such thing as:
* 486DX2/66 chip on a VLB/PCI/ISA board * NexGen P100 chip and board (was GREAT for Linux) * assorted video cards and sound cards * a few old FPM SIMMs
But I don't have any spare cases, monitors, hard drives, or CD-ROM drives. I seriously doubt it would be worth the money to build systems around these, so they just sit and collect dust...
You have the right to take your kids to "South Park" if you really want them to see it. But, if you do, you give up the right to complain when they start singing "Uncle Fucker" around the dinner table at grandmas... you asked for it.
You raise a valid point. America seems to be a land of militant Puritans, where you can see any sort of violence you want, as long as you don't see naked people.
Personally, I prefer not to watch either. Ultimately, though, it's up to personal choice. As for what our kids should see, that's up to parental choice. Parents who send their kids to the movies or sit them in front of the TV to get them out of their hair are (IMHO) failing in their jobs. I have no problem with a child seeing an R rated movie, so long as his/her parents either come along or see it first.
You requested response from fellow Christian Slashdot readers... here ya go...
I know you didn't want a point-by-point review, but it's the way I operate -- after all, I'm an engineer. If I have to agree with all-or-nothing, I'll have to disagree with the whole thing. However, I believe you made some very good points, and so I'm gonna have to line-item this one....
I agree that the author was wrong in misrepresenting himself. By taking those kids into the theater under false pretenses (and a false religious pretense, no less), he was (IMHO) doing more harm to those children than the movie did.
I also agree that the mother shouldn't have let her children see that movie. Or, if she insisted on letting them, she should have been there with them; however...
... She is their mother. It is HER responsibility to raise her children, and to determine if they are to see such things or not. It is not the responsibility of the theater to raise her children. If she wants the children to see the movie, it is not my job to tell them that they can't; however...
... I believe that the "R" rating prohibits children under 17 from entering without an "accompanying parent or adult guardian." The theaters have every right to enforce this.. and, remember, a legal guardian isn't your 18-year old brother.
As for your "religious discrimination" comment, here's my experience: I have yet to see a school that bans personal prayer. If one exists, it needs to be fixed or shut down. The US Constitution guarantees me the right to pray when I want, to whom I want.
What I HAVE seen, though, is schools that ban organized prayers during school functions. If you think this is such a bad thing, consider the following: Throughout my high-school years, and on into college, I was an Atheist. Even though we didn't have organized prayer in school, 99% of the people around me were (or claimed to be)Christians, and looked down on me because I wasn't. People were constantly trying to force their religion down my throat. I naturally rebelled, and wanted no part in it. Only after I went to college, and got away from that crap was I actually free to make a choice on my own. In the end, I chose God. The overwhelming weight of the religious right in my community growing up was the one thing that stood between me and God for all too long.
As for those who have complained about seeing unattended 7 and 8 year olds in movies like "South Park" and "Beavis & Butthead"... I wouldn't know. I don't go see those movies. I practice my morality more than I preach it. If it's not suitable for children, it's not suitable for me.
As for those readers who want to see these movies.. go for it. For those who want to take their kids to see these movies.. go for it. I might not agree with the choice, but it's your choice, not mine.
Certifications and degrees do not prove knowledge. I've seen all too many people wandering around with certifications and/or degrees who couldn't config their heads out of a paper bag. Meanwhile, I've met a great many home-grown technicians and engineers who could rewrite your OS from the ground up, even though they had never set foot in a college classroom or even picked up an A+ study guide.
At my last job, we had an 18-year old desktop support technician who knew more about the NT domain at the company than our MCSE-certified Systems Engineer did. Sure, the MCSE could quote Microsoft recommendations all day, but didn't have a single bit of real-world experience behind an NT domain. He couldn't handle the "make due with what we have" philosophy of our small company. He knew what we should have (according to Microsoft) to do what we wanted to do. He didn't know how to operate in the real world of tight budgets and obsolete hardware.
At my current job, I have a coworker who recently went from no certifications to an MCSE in just over 2 months. He's now certified to administer software that he's never even seen outside of shrinkwrap. Today he's also a Microsoft Certified Trainer, and plans to make his fortune training the future MCSEs to pass their tests without ever having to actually touch NT Server.
The biggest problem with certifications is that they hide the qualities that employers really should be looking for behind this "Microsoft says I'm qualified" facade. If you have an MCSE, most employers assume that means you know how to administer an NT domain. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. If you don't have an MCSE, you have to prove that you can admin that domain.
If you have a CS degree, most employers assume that means you spent at least 4 years dedicated to learning your subject matter. The fact is that most college students today spend their 4+ years trying to get a degree while learning as little as possible.
This is not to say that certifications and degrees are worthless. Far from it. While they do NOT prove knowledge, they DO prove dedication. If you're not willing to spend the few months necessary to get your MCSE, how can your employer know that you're willing to spend the time necessary to make his network operate properly?
The point, however, is that certifications alone do not make one great. When it all comes down to the wire, knowledge is what really counts.
Slashdot Mirror
Those shackles are nothing more than a tool, yes. And I'm not going to get paranoid over the invention of shackles. I will get annoyed if you put them on peoples' legs unfairly, though. But, if you don't, I don't care whether they exist one way or another.
With all of the technophobia that we have bashed over the years, you would think that we slashdotters would be immune to this sort of paranoia. But whenever a government agency gets new technology, we go crazy with the possibilities of what the could do with it, whether they're actually doing it or not. Isn't that the same reaction our bosses have when they realize that we know more about the company's systems than they do?
It's paranoid technophobia, plain and simple.
Rob
It's all paranoia, if you ask me. It's a tool, folks. Nothing else.
Rob
I could pick up several cases from friends, but none of them have power supplies. See, all of my friends are like me -- they don't replace their case until the power supply dies. I know one guy who's running a K6 in an original AT case. He had to replace the power supply once, but that's about it.
Rob
I could find a LOT of uses for a 486. Heck, it'll even run Windows NT (barely).
I don't have any complete systems laying around. All I have is parts. The last complete system I bought was back in '93, and I've just been upgradig since then. So now I have such thing as:
* 486DX2/66 chip on a VLB/PCI/ISA board
* NexGen P100 chip and board (was GREAT for Linux)
* assorted video cards and sound cards
* a few old FPM SIMMs
But I don't have any spare cases, monitors, hard drives, or CD-ROM drives. I seriously doubt it would be worth the money to build systems around these, so they just sit and collect dust...
I guess the bottom line for me is this:
You have the right to take your kids to "South Park" if you really want them to see it. But, if you do, you give up the right to complain when they start singing "Uncle Fucker" around the dinner table at grandmas... you asked for it.
You raise a valid point. America seems to be a land of militant Puritans, where you can see any sort of violence you want, as long as you don't see naked people.
Personally, I prefer not to watch either. Ultimately, though, it's up to personal choice. As for what our kids should see, that's up to parental choice. Parents who send their kids to the movies or sit them in front of the TV to get them out of their hair are (IMHO) failing in their jobs. I have no problem with a child seeing an R rated movie, so long as his/her parents either come along or see it first.
I know you didn't want a point-by-point review, but it's the way I operate -- after all, I'm an engineer. If I have to agree with all-or-nothing, I'll have to disagree with the whole thing. However, I believe you made some very good points, and so I'm gonna have to line-item this one....
Come now, people...
Certifications and degrees do not prove knowledge. I've seen all too many people wandering around with certifications and/or degrees who couldn't config their heads out of a paper bag. Meanwhile, I've met a great many home-grown technicians and engineers who could rewrite your OS from the ground up, even though they had never set foot in a college classroom or even picked up an A+ study guide.
At my last job, we had an 18-year old desktop support technician who knew more about the NT domain at the company than our MCSE-certified Systems Engineer did. Sure, the MCSE could quote Microsoft recommendations all day, but didn't have a single bit of real-world experience behind an NT domain. He couldn't handle the "make due with what we have" philosophy of our small company. He knew what we should have (according to Microsoft) to do what we wanted to do. He didn't know how to operate in the real world of tight budgets and obsolete hardware.
At my current job, I have a coworker who recently went from no certifications to an MCSE in just over 2 months. He's now certified to administer software that he's never even seen outside of shrinkwrap. Today he's also a Microsoft Certified Trainer, and plans to make his fortune training the future MCSEs to pass their tests without ever having to actually touch NT Server.
The biggest problem with certifications is that they hide the qualities that employers really should be looking for behind this "Microsoft says I'm qualified" facade. If you have an MCSE, most employers assume that means you know how to administer an NT domain. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. If you don't have an MCSE, you have to prove that you can admin that domain.
If you have a CS degree, most employers assume that means you spent at least 4 years dedicated to learning your subject matter. The fact is that most college students today spend their 4+ years trying to get a degree while learning as little as possible.
This is not to say that certifications and degrees are worthless. Far from it. While they do NOT prove knowledge, they DO prove dedication. If you're not willing to spend the few months necessary to get your MCSE, how can your employer know that you're willing to spend the time necessary to make his network operate properly?
The point, however, is that certifications alone do not make one great. When it all comes down to the wire, knowledge is what really counts.