Well, I didn't mean to touch a sore spot or make enemies.
I certainly didn't mean anything against the EU. I look at a lot of things that happen in large legislative bodies (including the US goverment) and I say, "what the heck did that accomplish?" That is the summary of my feeling in this.
I'm not exactly supporting MS in this matter either. I'm just looking at this and seeing it as zero sum. I'm a proud associate member of the FSF, and a supporter of free software.
I was really going for "funny" rather than derogative. Seriously, however, if by "having nothing happen to them," Microsoft is somehow paying in all of this, then, yes, they're paying. I don't think that this will lead to:
1) Microsoft losing a dime 2) My wireless card working without NDISWrapper (Yes, this is being typed on my Gentoo Linux notebook, on which I hack code that goes onto Linux clusters to support research at the lab at which I hold my research assistantship).
So, I look at it and shrug my shoulders. It's not my intention to push anyone's buttons. And, if anybody involved in this bit is offended, well then, I apologize. It wasn't my intent. My intent was to look at it say, "this is what I see this as." I still see it that way. It's the organizations that are migrating to free software that MS has to be afraid of (and only if more of them start doing so). I just don't see this act as a likely step in the direction of increasing that number. Perhaps I'll get an email from my buddy at the FSF explaining that I got it all wrong tonight.
Again, perhaps I should stop posting on Slashdot though. I have to be mindful of my political stance, or potential employers and collaborators may be turned off, and, besides, other students here seem to view it as a terrible waste of otherwise productive time. Especially given my proclivity for entering flame wars. I guess that the way that we become accustomed to speaking about such topics in graduate school has a grating manner about it. I remember feeling somewhat grated by friends who were in grad school before I returned to school, probably because they spoke the way that I do now.
Also, I should state that I have the utmost respect for Stanford University, it's faculty, and it's students.
Ok, enough backpeddling. WhiteWolf666, lose the attitude man. I have an opinion. As to my intellect, I don't really need you to judge it. I have plenty of feedback from people that I have a very deep level of respect for. I tire of Slashdot posters going lowest common denominator on me whenever they disagree with something that I have to say.
Listen, the end result was that MS published their source and that nothing has happened. Either way, if the EU really felt all that passionate about this, they'd go with a different vendor. Nobody is forcing them to use MS. They could go out and purchase a pile of Macs or Sun machines tomorrow. This solution yields nothing for anyone.
In other words, I think that, despite the fact that I've been focussing more on getting a PhD than reading Slashdot for the past several years of my life, that I still have a pretty good grip on the world. I don't need to insult you for pretending to be a vampire in your freetime to make my point.
By the way, I didn't mean that as an insult against the dean of admission at Stanford. It was really meant in a more ironic tone. Goodness, I'll just have to stop posting to Slashdot.
Are you a complete idiot, intentional obtuse, an MSFT employee, or all of the above?
A complete idiot I suppose. I thougth that the EU had solicited the publication of MSFT source code. I'll go back into my hole now. Thanks for making it personal. Your level of professionalism indicates that you must certainly be the dean of admissions at Stanford. I bow in your presence.
The EU can't find it in their hearts to switch to Linux, but feel that OSS is the right way to go. The solution, force MS to publish their source.
What a victory for... capitalism? No, if they were letting capitalism work, they'd switch products. Open Source? The FSF must be thrilled that they can now license to peek at MS source... not so much. Ahh, Linux... no, the EU hates Linux so much, that they can't bear the thought of departing from Windows.
Whoever you are, whatever you've accomplished, uhmm, congratulations or... something.
I had informed an employer of plans to depart for graduate school.
My boss there tried to block me from visiting a school by citing how I had to be in the office.
Not to sound brazen (I was quite diplomatic about the deal), but, what was he going to do, fire me? That would have added a couple weeks of severance pay to my departure.
If you make an assertion that is scientific in nature, and you can't back it with any science, then you jeapordize your entire argument.
It would be better to say "we don't know that this is safe," than to claim anything else. Doing anything else puts you in an indefensible position in light of contrary evidence, and destroys all credibility.
Trust me, I don't trust any of the "science" from the scientists hired by Womens Christian Temperance early last century. Why? Because they suggested that dropping a pigs eye in hydrochloric acid is somehow demonstrative of what happens to your brain when you drink. Funny, considering that lab animals in high school that have been prepped for dissection are stored in alcohol.
contains multiple toxic and carcinogenic substances with no known safety threshold. This means that any exposure against your will is a violation of your rights, and has a small - but accumulative - detrimental effect to your health.
Actually, I hope that I'm not being offensive in stating this, but it means that you don't know what it does. It is altogether possible that every substance in cigarette smoke that has an unknown safety threshold is present in such amounts, especially from fifty feet, that it is below this threshold, meaning that the cigarette has no effect on you. Additionally, this would preclude the effects being cumilative. Even if the chemicals were above some threshold, one would have to demonstrate the cumilative nature of the threat.
All of that aside, this poses a greater issue than the atomic issue of accuracy of measurements and statements (which all scientists are acutely aware of). The simple matter of understanding the need to conduct good science on such issues is at stake. One may wish to counter the claims of the tobacco industry. One may wish to disprove manufactured results favoring the industry. When doing so, it is worth observing some caution. An invalid finding on your part, that you manufacture, that helps you fight the perceived injustice of the competitor will eventually invalidate your results. How many others will reference your work as supporting evidence? It is possible that you will jeapordize the cause that you are fighting for by yielding such results.
Goodness. The simple fact of the matter is that "Communist" is a loaded word. People will bandy it about to try to make a point, but that doesn't change its meaning.
I'm not exactly talking about becoming a total libtertine. My grandmother drinks Remy Martin XO whenever she has a drink, and enjoys one almost every night.
When I'm on my last legs, I'm pretty sure that I'm tossing the gym membership and signing up for the Cigar, Scotch, and Hamburger of the Month clubs, as well as enjoying biscuits and gravy with sunny side up eggs every morning for breakfast. All of that while gambling my money away.
Pretty much, everything that I do in moderation now, I'll do to the degree that it will kill me by the time I'm in my 70s or 80s. What will my doctor say? "You know, smoking could knock the last 5 or 6 months off your life at the rate you're going."
Well, I really meant more along the lines of "of your own volition" and so forth. So, the company not asking or requiring or, even, needing you to do this.
More along the lines of "I just want to do my job better."
There's nothing wrong with that.
I just finished my Masters degree as well, but, well, I quit my job ahead of time and didn't work for them at the same time. They had a benefit, but I wanted to move on with my life and on to better horizons.
Unfortunately the planet takes ten years to circle the red dwarf and has a surface temperature estimated at -220 C which means it's just a larger version of Pluto so the chance of finding life on this planet is essentially zero.
It's especially unfortunate given the ease of a mission requiring us to travel 20,000 light years from Earth, then survive 57.3 Kelvin temperatutes.
That still places the burden of receiving training on the employee.
When I was an employee at a defense contractor, I learned to use Gallium Intermaphics. This is a very expensive proprietary library owned by a Canadian company called Gallium. In all honesty, it's a pretty nice library. You stick in map files and it changes their projections and such as dictated by parameters that you feed it.
Now I'm a graduate student. Should I have had to pay back a large loan to learn to use this product? I have, literally, no use for the training that I received during that course, and predict never having use for it again. It was only to develop a software product for the company.
Now, consider the engineers from the other companies on that contract, who also received training. They never used it. Ever.
The sentiment that I was expressing is that, comparatively, the company may have been better off training the poster. It was more a judgement of the company's actions than a dig at the worker who left.
Well, exactly. Look at the other end though. They have an employee who is obviously willing to stay with the company, who did not receive the training.
It's not that I don't agree with the sentiment, but the company sent someone off to training who later returned the favor by jumping ship.
I've seen some training bungles in my time... like hundreds of thousands of dollars spent to train software engineers to use a proprietary software library... engineers who weren't even with the company that was doing the development.
However, if the company felt it important enough to send the one person off to... why not the other?
On one side, the company probably has a training budget. Did the original poster already have all the training budgeted to her that year? Well, no room to complain. Is the company trying to fleece the original poster? Well, that's a reason to complain.
Then there are a couple other points to that. If you're getting something out of your job that's more than a paycheck, it doesn't hurt to chip in a bit of personal expense to sharpen your skills. If the company treats you poorly otherwise, and you really don't get much out of your job, they probably at least owe you the training and equipment to do what they ask.
I believe that's what the grandparent post wast bitching about.
Eh, I'd note that the gp wasn't bitching so much. People bandy about that term as if every time you say something that isn't a perfect ray of sunshine, that you're lambasting everyone in sight with your mindless rant.
Oh yeah? Well, I've had it up to here with that behavior. Stop running around destroying the english language by nullifying every statement that you disagree with. I can't stand this behavior. I'm seriously going to lose it next time someone does that, then you'll see. I'll call my lawyers, and my hitmen, and the president. I'll take my traveller's cheques to another resort. I'll put strychnine in the guacamole!!
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I didn't mean to touch a sore spot or make enemies.
I certainly didn't mean anything against the EU. I look at a lot of things that happen in large legislative bodies (including the US goverment) and I say, "what the heck did that accomplish?" That is the summary of my feeling in this.
I'm not exactly supporting MS in this matter either. I'm just looking at this and seeing it as zero sum. I'm a proud associate member of the FSF, and a supporter of free software.
I was really going for "funny" rather than derogative. Seriously, however, if by "having nothing happen to them," Microsoft is somehow paying in all of this, then, yes, they're paying. I don't think that this will lead to:
1) Microsoft losing a dime
2) My wireless card working without NDISWrapper (Yes, this is being typed on my Gentoo Linux notebook, on which I hack code that goes onto Linux clusters to support research at the lab at which I hold my research assistantship).
So, I look at it and shrug my shoulders. It's not my intention to push anyone's buttons. And, if anybody involved in this bit is offended, well then, I apologize. It wasn't my intent. My intent was to look at it say, "this is what I see this as." I still see it that way. It's the organizations that are migrating to free software that MS has to be afraid of (and only if more of them start doing so). I just don't see this act as a likely step in the direction of increasing that number. Perhaps I'll get an email from my buddy at the FSF explaining that I got it all wrong tonight.
Again, perhaps I should stop posting on Slashdot though. I have to be mindful of my political stance, or potential employers and collaborators may be turned off, and, besides, other students here seem to view it as a terrible waste of otherwise productive time. Especially given my proclivity for entering flame wars. I guess that the way that we become accustomed to speaking about such topics in graduate school has a grating manner about it. I remember feeling somewhat grated by friends who were in grad school before I returned to school, probably because they spoke the way that I do now.
This is like a convention. Are you folks Camarilla members?
Also, I should state that I have the utmost respect for Stanford University, it's faculty, and it's students.
Ok, enough backpeddling. WhiteWolf666, lose the attitude man. I have an opinion. As to my intellect, I don't really need you to judge it. I have plenty of feedback from people that I have a very deep level of respect for. I tire of Slashdot posters going lowest common denominator on me whenever they disagree with something that I have to say.
Listen, the end result was that MS published their source and that nothing has happened. Either way, if the EU really felt all that passionate about this, they'd go with a different vendor. Nobody is forcing them to use MS. They could go out and purchase a pile of Macs or Sun machines tomorrow. This solution yields nothing for anyone.
In other words, I think that, despite the fact that I've been focussing more on getting a PhD than reading Slashdot for the past several years of my life, that I still have a pretty good grip on the world. I don't need to insult you for pretending to be a vampire in your freetime to make my point.
By the way, I didn't mean that as an insult against the dean of admission at Stanford. It was really meant in a more ironic tone. Goodness, I'll just have to stop posting to Slashdot.
Are you a complete idiot, intentional obtuse, an MSFT employee, or all of the above?
A complete idiot I suppose. I thougth that the EU had solicited the publication of MSFT source code. I'll go back into my hole now. Thanks for making it personal. Your level of professionalism indicates that you must certainly be the dean of admissions at Stanford. I bow in your presence.
The EU can't find it in their hearts to switch to Linux, but feel that OSS is the right way to go. The solution, force MS to publish their source.
What a victory for... capitalism? No, if they were letting capitalism work, they'd switch products. Open Source? The FSF must be thrilled that they can now license to peek at MS source... not so much. Ahh, Linux... no, the EU hates Linux so much, that they can't bear the thought of departing from Windows.
Whoever you are, whatever you've accomplished, uhmm, congratulations or... something.
"The nail that sticks out gets hammered in," is the proverb that you're thinking of.
It's really referring to the "virtues," if you prefer, of being conformist.
I had informed an employer of plans to depart for graduate school.
My boss there tried to block me from visiting a school by citing how I had to be in the office.
Not to sound brazen (I was quite diplomatic about the deal), but, what was he going to do, fire me? That would have added a couple weeks of severance pay to my departure.
If you make an assertion that is scientific in nature, and you can't back it with any science, then you jeapordize your entire argument.
It would be better to say "we don't know that this is safe," than to claim anything else. Doing anything else puts you in an indefensible position in light of contrary evidence, and destroys all credibility.
Trust me, I don't trust any of the "science" from the scientists hired by Womens Christian Temperance early last century. Why? Because they suggested that dropping a pigs eye in hydrochloric acid is somehow demonstrative of what happens to your brain when you drink. Funny, considering that lab animals in high school that have been prepped for dissection are stored in alcohol.
contains multiple toxic and carcinogenic substances with no known safety threshold. This means that any exposure against your will is a violation of your rights, and has a small - but accumulative - detrimental effect to your health.
Actually, I hope that I'm not being offensive in stating this, but it means that you don't know what it does. It is altogether possible that every substance in cigarette smoke that has an unknown safety threshold is present in such amounts, especially from fifty feet, that it is below this threshold, meaning that the cigarette has no effect on you. Additionally, this would preclude the effects being cumilative. Even if the chemicals were above some threshold, one would have to demonstrate the cumilative nature of the threat.
All of that aside, this poses a greater issue than the atomic issue of accuracy of measurements and statements (which all scientists are acutely aware of). The simple matter of understanding the need to conduct good science on such issues is at stake. One may wish to counter the claims of the tobacco industry. One may wish to disprove manufactured results favoring the industry. When doing so, it is worth observing some caution. An invalid finding on your part, that you manufacture, that helps you fight the perceived injustice of the competitor will eventually invalidate your results. How many others will reference your work as supporting evidence? It is possible that you will jeapordize the cause that you are fighting for by yielding such results.
That's not true.
Goodness. The simple fact of the matter is that "Communist" is a loaded word. People will bandy it about to try to make a point, but that doesn't change its meaning.
I'm not exactly talking about becoming a total libtertine. My grandmother drinks Remy Martin XO whenever she has a drink, and enjoys one almost every night.
I wouldn't deny her it.
Why not just buy the beer for her?
When I'm on my last legs, I'm pretty sure that I'm tossing the gym membership and signing up for the Cigar, Scotch, and Hamburger of the Month clubs, as well as enjoying biscuits and gravy with sunny side up eggs every morning for breakfast. All of that while gambling my money away.
Pretty much, everything that I do in moderation now, I'll do to the degree that it will kill me by the time I'm in my 70s or 80s. What will my doctor say? "You know, smoking could knock the last 5 or 6 months off your life at the rate you're going."
Yeah, whoops, I thought that I had that conversion memorized.
Well, I really meant more along the lines of "of your own volition" and so forth. So, the company not asking or requiring or, even, needing you to do this.
More along the lines of "I just want to do my job better."
There's nothing wrong with that.
I just finished my Masters degree as well, but, well, I quit my job ahead of time and didn't work for them at the same time. They had a benefit, but I wanted to move on with my life and on to better horizons.
Unfortunately the planet takes ten years to circle the red dwarf and has a surface temperature estimated at -220 C which means it's just a larger version of Pluto so the chance of finding life on this planet is essentially zero.
It's especially unfortunate given the ease of a mission requiring us to travel 20,000 light years from Earth, then survive 57.3 Kelvin temperatutes.
That still places the burden of receiving training on the employee.
When I was an employee at a defense contractor, I learned to use Gallium Intermaphics. This is a very expensive proprietary library owned by a Canadian company called Gallium. In all honesty, it's a pretty nice library. You stick in map files and it changes their projections and such as dictated by parameters that you feed it.
Now I'm a graduate student. Should I have had to pay back a large loan to learn to use this product? I have, literally, no use for the training that I received during that course, and predict never having use for it again. It was only to develop a software product for the company.
Now, consider the engineers from the other companies on that contract, who also received training. They never used it. Ever.
The sentiment that I was expressing is that, comparatively, the company may have been better off training the poster. It was more a judgement of the company's actions than a dig at the worker who left.
I've left a company once or twice myself.
Google is a really good, really hard to set up search engine... but pagerank is published, and China could (probably) build another search engine.
I'm not saying that that it isn't hard, I'm just saying, if China wants to kick Google out... it's not going to start crumbling from within.
Well, exactly. Look at the other end though. They have an employee who is obviously willing to stay with the company, who did not receive the training.
I feel that you should seriously consider your dedication to Slashdot, if you're so easily distracted.
It's not that I don't agree with the sentiment, but the company sent someone off to training who later returned the favor by jumping ship.
I've seen some training bungles in my time... like hundreds of thousands of dollars spent to train software engineers to use a proprietary software library... engineers who weren't even with the company that was doing the development.
However, if the company felt it important enough to send the one person off to... why not the other?
On one side, the company probably has a training budget. Did the original poster already have all the training budgeted to her that year? Well, no room to complain. Is the company trying to fleece the original poster? Well, that's a reason to complain.
Then there are a couple other points to that. If you're getting something out of your job that's more than a paycheck, it doesn't hurt to chip in a bit of personal expense to sharpen your skills. If the company treats you poorly otherwise, and you really don't get much out of your job, they probably at least owe you the training and equipment to do what they ask.
It was really more of a joke.
Hence the quotes from Office Space toward the end of the post.
I believe that's what the grandparent post wast bitching about.
Eh, I'd note that the gp wasn't bitching so much. People bandy about that term as if every time you say something that isn't a perfect ray of sunshine, that you're lambasting everyone in sight with your mindless rant.
Oh yeah? Well, I've had it up to here with that behavior. Stop running around destroying the english language by nullifying every statement that you disagree with. I can't stand this behavior. I'm seriously going to lose it next time someone does that, then you'll see. I'll call my lawyers, and my hitmen, and the president. I'll take my traveller's cheques to another resort. I'll put strychnine in the guacamole!!
That was pretty much my sentiment, but I guess that I did sound kind of condemnatory or snooty in the observation thereof (perhaps).