There's been quite a few cases already where they have been against allowing kids to pray in schools (which kind of seems like a civil liberty to me!)
Should a group with the name "American Civil Liberties Union" be for or against allowing children to worship as they wish?
It seems to me that a reading of the ACLU position on school prayer gives you the answer - the ACLU is very much in favor of letting children worship as they wish. Or not, if they don't wish to.
Here is the ACLU position:
If a child in public school wishes to say grace before eating a meal in the school cafeteria, or carry a bible to school to read in between classes, she has the right now under the First Amendment to do so. That is religious freedom.
But if the school conducts an official grace before meals so that every student in the cafeteria is subjected to it whether she believes in it or not, that is not permitted by the First Amendment because it reflects official government endorsement or sponsorship of religion, and imposes religious beliefs on children whose families may not share them. This is true even if the grace ceremony is "student initiated." Individual rights means that any student can say grace, but no student can be subjected to a religious ceremony because the majority outvotes her. That is not religious freedom.
I would say that in the current job market getting an entry level opsition is going to be a lot tougher than it was 18-24 months ago. But if you are patient, there is no doubt that things will get better.
As far as being to old at 33, that is nonsense. I made the switch to IT at age 50, although I had many years of experience working with computing equipment, and a very solid math background as a chemical engineer.
The biggest thing that I find is that there are a large percentage of techies that are much younger than I am, and this does create a bit of a gap in terms of communications and culture. But if you are like me and never really grew up, it's not hard to relate with your coworkers.
The other part of the process that I find challenging is growing my expertise rapidly enough to get where I want to be in terms of my second career - unlike those younger folks, I don't have 10-15 years to spend gaining experience.
What I would be concerned most about at age 33 is whether or not IT is where you want to be long term. IT will be a great career with lots of growth potential so long as Moore's conjecture holds true. However once the growth curve peaks out I think IT will become mature, and thus much less desireable. When that will occur is anyones guess, unfortunately. But I think we have at least 10-15 years left - which should take me into retirement nicely.
Re:JBuilder is OK... VAJ sucks!
on
Java IDEs?
·
· Score: 2
With Metaframe you can run apps hosted on a NT Terminal Server to any number of platforms (Linux, Unix, Mac,Windows, WinTerms, etc). If the university only had say, 250 users at any one time running Office, instead of purchasing 500 licenses, they could purchase 250.
Don't count on it. Microsoft is increasingly going to a per user licensing scheme. This means if you have 500 users that use Office both remotely at home and via a broadband connection at home you need to buy 1000 licenses.
You will also need to license the server on a per user basis.
Broadband is doing just fine where I live (Central NJ). Most of my neighbors have cable modems on Optimum Online with it's great 1 Mb/sec up 5 Mb/sec down service at $29.95/mo. Just about eveyone I work with has some sort of DSL/Cable modem sevice as well.
The only thing that is slowing down broadband at the moment is the economic slowdown in the US has some Telco's profits in the dumps. As soon as things start picking up again broadband will really take off.
lets forget about the estimated 200000 civilians dead during the Gulf War
You have swallowed the propaganda of a genocidal madman hook line and sinker.
The people who died in Iraq are the sole responsibility of Saddam Hussien. His regime invaded Kuwait and Iran, not the other way around. Saddam conducted wars of extemination against his own people.
The UN has given the Iraqi govenment the wherewithal to pay for food and medicine with humanitarian relief through a variety of mechanisms including sale of oil. Saddam has taken any money he can get from these means and spent it on his military rather than buying food for the needy of his country. Not to mention the internal wars of genocide using chemical and biological warfare he has conducted against his own people. This man stands in the first rank of the mass murderers of the 20th century.
I think it is despicable that you have chosen to align yourself with such a person.
most of the middle-east places don't want the US around.
Not true at all. Most of the Middle East rightly regards the US a major stabilizing force in the region. After all, the same terrorists that pulled off the WTC attack assasinated Sadat, and have carried out numerous other attacks in the Middle East trying to engender the formation of other radical Islamic states. Many of the Middle Easten governments have in fact asked the US to be involved in the egion in many ways - to contol Iraq, and to establish a framework for an eventual solution to the Palestinian problem.
When the mess in the presidential elections was going on, many Middle Eastern people expressed concern because the believe a strong US president is essential for progress to be made in stabilizing many of the problems in the Middle East.
Except that he's a egghead professsor and not actually a terrorist. Keep that in mind in your war with "the enemy within".
He's an egghead professor who has makes no sense whatsoever outside his field of expertise, and should NOT be quoted as an authority on ANY topic outside his field.
well, religious purposes, not political. but who knows, maybe their "hidden agenda" *is* political.
Since the goal of these groups is establishment of radical Islamic states, religion and politics are the same thing. And the agenda is NOT hidden.
What people should consider is how the goals of the foundation of radical Islamic state parallel those of Fundamentalist Chistians in the US who want to establish a Christian Government.
It should bring you up short when you consider exactly what people like Falwell and Robertson want.
We do this in other countries all over the world, spilled the blood of the people of those countries (mostly innocent), in numbers greater than those on September 11th
What is the altenative? To let tyanny rule the world?
The fact is that if the US wee to pull in it's hons and leave the rest of the world to it's own devices Europe would be part of the Soviet Union right now.
Sure, we have made mistakes. But has the result oveall been to the good or not???
What gives the US and Britain the right to attack a sovereign nation in this manner?
7000 dead people.
But this self-righteous crusade our governments are currently on really pisses me off.
Cetainly the US can be accused of being hypocritical and self-righteous. However any nation would respond to the best of it's ability when faced with an incident like this.
What happens if something goes wrong in a fusion reactor? Literally, speaking. What could the consequences be?
If something goes wrong in a fusion reactor, nothing happens. The fusion process depends on confinement of a very small amount of very hot gas in exactly the right manner. When something goes wrong this gas disperses. Since the amount is very small it can do no damage.
One of the great attractions of fusion power is that it is fail-safe.
It seems to me that with the ever continuing changes in technology and the workplace, the importance skill is learning to learn. Face, with the exception of people skills everything you know today will be next to worthless in the workplace 5-10 years from now. Estimates are that people will have 5 careers over their working life span.
Do want a college education that will be uselss after the first career change, or do you want one that will be valuable to you over the course of a lifetime?
I would like to hear about reasons why there is no effort to expand the capabilities of websites with language-plugins.
Because the idea sucks. The place for code is on the server, not the client, for the following reasons:
1. Security
2. Compatability.
3. Portability.
4. Separation of presentation and logic.
The only time where it is possible to put logic on a client and get reliable performance is where you have complete control of the client's software and hardware - i.e. a closed computing environment.
Too bad we aren't learning from the British and Soviet mistakes.
This is the sort of nonsense comment that really turns me off slashdot at times. As best as I can tell we have not repeated any of the Russian or British mistakes in Afganistan, nor is it likely that we are going to try to make Afganistan a colony or territory like the Russians and British tried.
Sure, nobody said this is going to be an easy job. But it is quite clear that it is not going to be done solely through military means, nor would it even be possible to do solely through military means.
There are all sorts of limits on economic freedom for "the common good".
You bet. Absolute economic freedom leads to stuff like people dumping toxic wastes into the air and water, having 25% of the workforce having suffered serious on the job injuries, unsafe food and medicine, and so on.
So whats wrong with the government going ever further "for the common good"?
If you can convince enough people that the common good really requires it, nothing is wrong with it.
What is a political system all about in the final analysis? Providing for the common good.
Slashdot Mirror
There's been quite a few cases already where they have been against allowing kids to pray in schools (which kind of seems like a civil liberty to me!)
Should a group with the name "American Civil Liberties Union" be for or against allowing children to worship as they wish?
It seems to me that a reading of the ACLU position on school prayer gives you the answer - the ACLU is very much in favor of letting children worship as they wish. Or not, if they don't wish to.
Here is the ACLU position:
If a child in public school wishes to say grace before eating a meal in the school cafeteria, or carry a bible to school to read in between classes, she has the right now under the First Amendment to do so. That is religious freedom.
But if the school conducts an official grace before meals so that every student in the cafeteria is subjected to it whether she believes in it or not, that is not permitted by the First Amendment because it reflects official government endorsement or sponsorship of religion, and imposes religious beliefs on children whose families may not share them. This is true even if the grace ceremony is "student initiated." Individual rights means that any student can say grace, but no student can be subjected to a religious ceremony because the majority outvotes her. That is not religious freedom.
I would say that in the current job market getting an entry level opsition is going to be a lot tougher than it was 18-24 months ago. But if you are patient, there is no doubt that things will get better.
As far as being to old at 33, that is nonsense. I made the switch to IT at age 50, although I had many years of experience working with computing equipment, and a very solid math background as a chemical engineer.
The biggest thing that I find is that there are a large percentage of techies that are much younger than I am, and this does create a bit of a gap in terms of communications and culture. But if you are like me and never really grew up, it's not hard to relate with your coworkers.
The other part of the process that I find challenging is growing my expertise rapidly enough to get where I want to be in terms of my second career - unlike those younger folks, I don't have 10-15 years to spend gaining experience.
What I would be concerned most about at age 33 is whether or not IT is where you want to be long term. IT will be a great career with lots of growth potential so long as Moore's conjecture holds true. However once the growth curve peaks out I think IT will become mature, and thus much less desireable. When that will occur is anyones guess, unfortunately. But I think we have at least 10-15 years left - which should take me into retirement nicely.
I could not find that damned file anywhere!
VAJ uses a repository to store code.
With Metaframe you can run apps hosted on a NT Terminal Server to any number of platforms (Linux, Unix, Mac,Windows, WinTerms, etc). If the university only had say, 250 users at any one time running Office, instead of purchasing 500 licenses, they could purchase 250.
Don't count on it. Microsoft is increasingly going to a per user licensing scheme. This means if you have 500 users that use Office both remotely at home and via a broadband connection at home you need to buy 1000 licenses.
You will also need to license the server on a per user basis.
What if you have an older machine that is limited to 64M?
Then don't upgrade. If you want new features, you need the hardware to support them.
I follow Linux Kernel development. Current kernels handle at least 8 way without much degradation.
If you want to address large amounts of RAM (> GB), you are better off with a 64 bit architecture.
Which you can download from RedHat today.
It seems spending money and energy on court battles instead of putting the same resources into R&D is the kiss of death.
Since Polaroid won $929 Million in that lawsuit, I am sure thay had more money, not less for R&D.
Perhaps that should read
Broadband in the USA is Dead....
I think it should read "Cringley is an Idiot".
Broadband is doing just fine where I live (Central NJ). Most of my neighbors have cable modems on Optimum Online with it's great 1 Mb/sec up 5 Mb/sec down service at $29.95/mo. Just about eveyone I work with has some sort of DSL/Cable modem sevice as well.
The only thing that is slowing down broadband at the moment is the economic slowdown in the US has some Telco's profits in the dumps. As soon as things start picking up again broadband will really take off.
lets forget about the estimated 200000 civilians dead during the Gulf War
You have swallowed the propaganda of a genocidal madman hook line and sinker.
The people who died in Iraq are the sole responsibility of Saddam Hussien. His regime invaded Kuwait and Iran, not the other way around. Saddam conducted wars of extemination against his own people.
The UN has given the Iraqi govenment the wherewithal to pay for food and medicine with humanitarian relief through a variety of mechanisms including sale of oil. Saddam has taken any money he can get from these means and spent it on his military rather than buying food for the needy of his country. Not to mention the internal wars of genocide using chemical and biological warfare he has conducted against his own people. This man stands in the first rank of the mass murderers of the 20th century.
I think it is despicable that you have chosen to align yourself with such a person.
most of the middle-east places don't want the US around.
Not true at all. Most of the Middle East rightly regards the US a major stabilizing force in the region. After all, the same terrorists that pulled off the WTC attack assasinated Sadat, and have carried out numerous other attacks in the Middle East trying to engender the formation of other radical Islamic states. Many of the Middle Easten governments have in fact asked the US to be involved in the egion in many ways - to contol Iraq, and to establish a framework for an eventual solution to the Palestinian problem.
When the mess in the presidential elections was going on, many Middle Eastern people expressed concern because the believe a strong US president is essential for progress to be made in stabilizing many of the problems in the Middle East.
Except that he's a egghead professsor and not actually a terrorist. Keep that in mind in your war with "the enemy within".
He's an egghead professor who has makes no sense whatsoever outside his field of expertise, and should NOT be quoted as an authority on ANY topic outside his field.
well, religious purposes, not political. but who knows, maybe their "hidden agenda" *is* political.
Since the goal of these groups is establishment of radical Islamic states, religion and politics are the same thing. And the agenda is NOT hidden.
What people should consider is how the goals of the foundation of radical Islamic state parallel those of Fundamentalist Chistians in the US who want to establish a Christian Government.
It should bring you up short when you consider exactly what people like Falwell and Robertson want.
Chomsky is hardly an unbiased source. His history includes public support for the Khmer Rouge and similar organizations.
As far as I can tell he is just as radical as any member of Al-Queda.
Also. I fail to see the comparison between WW2 and the 9/11 attacks.
So what ae we supposed to do? Sit on ou thumbs and gurgle?
We do this in other countries all over the world, spilled the blood of the people of those countries (mostly innocent), in numbers greater than those on September 11th
What is the altenative? To let tyanny rule the world?
The fact is that if the US wee to pull in it's hons and leave the rest of the world to it's own devices Europe would be part of the Soviet Union right now.
Sure, we have made mistakes. But has the result oveall been to the good or not???
What gives the US and Britain the right to attack a sovereign nation in this manner?
7000 dead people.
But this self-righteous crusade our governments are currently on really pisses me off.
Cetainly the US can be accused of being hypocritical and self-righteous. However any nation would respond to the best of it's ability when faced with an incident like this.
What happens if something goes wrong in a fusion reactor? Literally, speaking. What could the consequences be?
If something goes wrong in a fusion reactor, nothing happens. The fusion process depends on confinement of a very small amount of very hot gas in exactly the right manner. When something goes wrong this gas disperses. Since the amount is very small it can do no damage.
One of the great attractions of fusion power is that it is fail-safe.
It seems to me that with the ever continuing changes in technology and the workplace, the importance skill is learning to learn. Face, with the exception of people skills everything you know today will be next to worthless in the workplace 5-10 years from now. Estimates are that people will have 5 careers over their working life span.
Do want a college education that will be uselss after the first career change, or do you want one that will be valuable to you over the course of a lifetime?
If your control issues still prevent you from accepting that, see a therapist.
It isn't a matter of control, but reality. If you don't cater to the biggest audience possible, you are throwing away potential customers.
This is why you don't see applets and flash on succesful e-commerce sites.
I thought it was best pilot of all the spin-offs - but no way does it compare to that great TOS pilot "The Cage"
So it's going to be the Confederation now??
I would like to hear about reasons why there is no effort to expand the capabilities of websites with language-plugins.
Because the idea sucks. The place for code is on the server, not the client, for the following reasons:
1. Security
2. Compatability.
3. Portability.
4. Separation of presentation and logic.
The only time where it is possible to put logic on a client and get reliable performance is where you have complete control of the client's software and hardware - i.e. a closed computing environment.
That is NOT the web.
Too bad we aren't learning from the British and Soviet mistakes.
This is the sort of nonsense comment that really turns me off slashdot at times. As best as I can tell we have not repeated any of the Russian or British mistakes in Afganistan, nor is it likely that we are going to try to make Afganistan a colony or territory like the Russians and British tried.
Sure, nobody said this is going to be an easy job. But it is quite clear that it is not going to be done solely through military means, nor would it even be possible to do solely through military means.
especially because it appears that one of those recon drones has already been shot down.
As far as anything the Taliban claims, I'll believe it when I see it with my own eyes..
There are all sorts of limits on economic freedom for "the common good".
You bet. Absolute economic freedom leads to stuff like people dumping toxic wastes into the air and water, having 25% of the workforce having suffered serious on the job injuries, unsafe food and medicine, and so on.
So whats wrong with the government going ever further "for the common good"?
If you can convince enough people that the common good really requires it, nothing is wrong with it.
What is a political system all about in the final analysis? Providing for the common good.