Seriously, if IT isn't serving the needs of your business, your IT is staffed with idiots and whiny bitches like the above poster. In the real world, people like you get sacked.
Sorry, but no. In the real world, IT pushes out Windows installs laden with all kinds of crapware (such as McAfee), resulting in systems that run dog-slow and crash and freeze all the time. These IT departments are rewarded for this incompetence with continued employment, bonuses, etc.
Also in the real world, HR departments are staffed with idiots who cause all kinds of problems with the company, yet again these people are rewarded with continued employment and bonuses.
In the real world, incompetent people are NOT sacked, they're given more power.
I don't know what "real world" you live in, but it's definitely not the one I live in. Maybe you live in the parallel universe that Star Trek: TNG is set in, where everyone is hyper-competent.
Basically you're calling them "not true Scotsmen". Your argument boils down to "those who disagree with my interpretation of scriptures aren't true Christians", which is fallacious thinking. Those people will say the exact same thing of you, and that you're not a true Christian.
I'm not talking about one of two so-called "Christians" acting poorly, I'm talking about entire denominations.
For instance, juts look at the entire "Prosperity Doctrine" school of Christian thought, with prominent preachers like Joel Osteen, who basically preach that God loves rich people more and has blessed them with wealth. You can't say that's "not Christianity"; that's a prime example of the No True Scotsman fallacy. Any group of people can be judged by the actions of its members (which of course is why many groups divide into different sects to try to distance themselves from people they don't want to be associated with).
Once upon a time in the USA many localities had laws that forbade businesses to be open on Sundays. That went by the board because it's not just companies that compete
No, it didn't. Bergen County, New Jersey still has these laws, and it's one of the wealthiest counties in the country.
Depends on which Christian groups, and which brutality. I saw some Christian movie a while ago about some random people who meet Jesus in a roadside diner, and one "disbeliever" asks him about the part about Jews slaughtering some other tribes, and "Jesus" says "yes, I ordered them to kill those people because they were sinners". A lot of Christianity these days seems to be all about backing up the brutality in the OT, following the laws of Leviticus (selectively of course), etc.
Except for the part where God orders the Jews to murder other tribes; yes, this is OT, but ask any evangelical Christian and they'll back all that violence up.
That guy is a moron. Arizona has smog checks do, and so do lots of other places. My experience is with AZ; the checks are easy: you just drive up to a state-run emissions checking station, and have them do the test. If it's '96+, they just plug in an OBD-II reader and look for codes. If there are none, you're done, and you just pay the fee and drive a way with your certificate. If it's pre-96, they put it on a dyno and check the emissions directly. If you pass (not hard to do if the engine is running OK), again pay your fee and take your certificate.
If you fail, you have a certain amount of time to fix it. You do NOT need to have a "certified mechanic" or somesuch fix it, you can do it yourself. Then you come back later after it's fixed and get it re-tested. It's really not a big deal unless you've seriously modified your engine, taken out the catalytic converter, etc.
There's only two places in the US where you can get away without owning a car without being consigned to poverty: SF and NYC (and only certain boroughs there even). Both these places are outrageously and unaffordably expensive for most people. In fact, lots of people have to commute into these places on trains, and I'm sorry, but spending 3-4 hours a day on a train is not preferable to a 30-minute commute by car.
It doesn't matter how cheap service is; it should never leave your car in an unsafe condition, nor should that service ever attempt to defraud you. Fraud is illegal, and making it so your wheel falls off is criminal negligence. If you can't run your business in such a way that you don't need to resort to fraud or endanger your customers' lives, then you shouldn't be in business in the first place.
Ding ding! Places like that are always looking to upsell, so when you come in for an oil change, they look for something else to sell you, such as an air filter change, a transmission oil change, brake service, etc. Sometimes they even do things like show you a worn belt or filter which isn't even from your car, claiming it is, and saying it needs to be changed.
Unfortunately, many times the monkeys at these service places don't know how to put wheels back on correctly.
MySQL's normal db engine isn't ACID, so if you care about data integrity, PostgreSQL is a better choice. MySQL's innodb engine is ACID, but doesn't perform as well as Postgres. At least that's my understanding of the situation. I honestly don't see the point at all of using a DB that isn't ACID.
Outside sensors are becoming much more commonplace on not-so-expensive cars. I test-drove a Mazda 3 recently (about $27K fully loaded) which had not only a rearview camera, but a blind-spot radar warning system. (I'm not sure if it had parking sonar sensors or not; I didn't get to parallel park it, and a lot of modern parking sensors hide completely behind the bumpers instead of being obvious like in earlier models.)
Rearview cameras will be mandatory in all new cars in a few years. I wouldn't be surprised if blind-spot warning systems follow suit shortly after.
There's been high-end cars for a little while with thermal infrared imaging; I imagine those will be commonplace in another decade or two.
Too late, someone already called it "just another thing to go wrong". It sure seems that these idiotic Slashdotters would rather just drive around in Model Ts. Is there some other site that covers tech news, and actually has techies commenting rather than anti-tech luddites? This site is pathetic.
The Bay Area is one of the liberal places on the planet. The Fresno area, not so much. Eich isn't living in Fresno or Sacramento, he lives and works in the Bay Area.
I have FIOS available at my house and I opted for Comcast. Why? Simple: price. Comcast is at least $20/month cheaper. I was smart enough to buy my own modem (got it at Target for $50 IIRC, just DOCSIS2 Motorola Surfboard), and other than having to wait several days for a technician to show up for the installation (for some reason they need to send someone, instead of doing it remotely like my own cableco Cox), everything's been working mostly OK.
My neighbors, who had FIOS, had to regularly reboot their FIOS box (which was located in my garage; we share the same property) because the thing was flaky.
Yes you can. Look up the Trinity project. As long as there's developers who want to fork the project and support it, you can use that DE. It's the same thing that happened with Gnome2/MATE.
If you're a big company running proprietary binaries it becomes more of a challenge to upgrade
Which is a good reason to not run proprietary binaries that are locked to an old kernel/userspace. Regular users don't have this problem since they only run open-source stuff, and companies running their own internal software wouldn't have this problem either. We're mainly talking about individual users here anyway, so the 10-year-old proprietary binary thing shouldn't be an issue there.
If a company doesn't want certain people representing it in public as their public face, which is exactly what the CEO is, they have every right to not place those people as CEOs. CEOs are not normal employees, and in other countries don't even have regular employment contracts (I'd be surprised if they do here in the US too), and are not subject to the same worker protections. There's different rules for people at the top.
Yes, and the people pushing "separate but equal", with separate bathrooms and water fountains for black people, also didn't exactly say that blacks were subhuman did they?
Maybe, maybe not. If you're a nobody, HR likely doesn't give two shits what political campaigns you donated to, as long as you don't make the national news and drag your company's name into it. If you're a CEO and you make international news because of your political views and donations, expect trouble.
I disagree. There's good reasons for protecting people from discrimination according to certain classes; the whole idea is to prevent classes of people from being stuck in an underclass because no one will employ them.
However, it's also important that people be qualified for the jobs they're in. For instance, discriminating against black people is normally bad, but what if the job is to be a model for clothing targeted at white people, or an actor for a product that only certain white demographics are interested in? Conversely, what if the job is to model hair accessories that only black people would be interested in; should white models be excluded? As far as I know, in jobs like this (modeling, acting), employers have very wide latitude. A black actor isn't going to get very far suing Stephen Spielberg because he couldn't get hired to play the part of Abraham Lincoln, nor would male actor get far suing Spielberg for refusing to cast him as Lincoln's wife.
Eich was not just some low-level worker, he was the CEO (briefly). As such, he's the public face of the company, so his political positions absolutely do reflect on the company as a whole. To me, that means that the company has every right to scrutinize his public political positions, and to remove him if the customer base rebels and decides they hate him and are boycotting the company. The same isn't true of some low-level coder, or the janitor; these people are (more) easily replaced, and aren't paid nearly as much either. Being the top boss of a company carries a big paycheck and a lot of privileges and visibility, but along with that there's downsides, such as a lack of privacy and being subject to the whims of the board. Don't like it? Don't apply for the job. Stay a low-level manager. It's just like being a celebrity. If you're a celebrity making millions of dollars per movie, or an outspoken politician, you have no right to complain that you have no privacy. It's part of the territory. If you value your privacy that much, stay the heck out of the limelight. No one forced you into that job.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, if IT isn't serving the needs of your business, your IT is staffed with idiots and whiny bitches like the above poster.
In the real world, people like you get sacked.
Sorry, but no. In the real world, IT pushes out Windows installs laden with all kinds of crapware (such as McAfee), resulting in systems that run dog-slow and crash and freeze all the time. These IT departments are rewarded for this incompetence with continued employment, bonuses, etc.
Also in the real world, HR departments are staffed with idiots who cause all kinds of problems with the company, yet again these people are rewarded with continued employment and bonuses.
In the real world, incompetent people are NOT sacked, they're given more power.
I don't know what "real world" you live in, but it's definitely not the one I live in. Maybe you live in the parallel universe that Star Trek: TNG is set in, where everyone is hyper-competent.
Basically you're calling them "not true Scotsmen". Your argument boils down to "those who disagree with my interpretation of scriptures aren't true Christians", which is fallacious thinking. Those people will say the exact same thing of you, and that you're not a true Christian.
I'm not talking about one of two so-called "Christians" acting poorly, I'm talking about entire denominations.
For instance, juts look at the entire "Prosperity Doctrine" school of Christian thought, with prominent preachers like Joel Osteen, who basically preach that God loves rich people more and has blessed them with wealth. You can't say that's "not Christianity"; that's a prime example of the No True Scotsman fallacy. Any group of people can be judged by the actions of its members (which of course is why many groups divide into different sects to try to distance themselves from people they don't want to be associated with).
Once upon a time in the USA many localities had laws that forbade businesses to be open on Sundays. That went by the board because it's not just companies that compete
No, it didn't. Bergen County, New Jersey still has these laws, and it's one of the wealthiest counties in the country.
Depends on which Christian groups, and which brutality. I saw some Christian movie a while ago about some random people who meet Jesus in a roadside diner, and one "disbeliever" asks him about the part about Jews slaughtering some other tribes, and "Jesus" says "yes, I ordered them to kill those people because they were sinners". A lot of Christianity these days seems to be all about backing up the brutality in the OT, following the laws of Leviticus (selectively of course), etc.
Except for the part where God orders the Jews to murder other tribes; yes, this is OT, but ask any evangelical Christian and they'll back all that violence up.
That guy is a moron. Arizona has smog checks do, and so do lots of other places. My experience is with AZ; the checks are easy: you just drive up to a state-run emissions checking station, and have them do the test. If it's '96+, they just plug in an OBD-II reader and look for codes. If there are none, you're done, and you just pay the fee and drive a way with your certificate. If it's pre-96, they put it on a dyno and check the emissions directly. If you pass (not hard to do if the engine is running OK), again pay your fee and take your certificate.
If you fail, you have a certain amount of time to fix it. You do NOT need to have a "certified mechanic" or somesuch fix it, you can do it yourself. Then you come back later after it's fixed and get it re-tested. It's really not a big deal unless you've seriously modified your engine, taken out the catalytic converter, etc.
There's only two places in the US where you can get away without owning a car without being consigned to poverty: SF and NYC (and only certain boroughs there even). Both these places are outrageously and unaffordably expensive for most people. In fact, lots of people have to commute into these places on trains, and I'm sorry, but spending 3-4 hours a day on a train is not preferable to a 30-minute commute by car.
It doesn't matter how cheap service is; it should never leave your car in an unsafe condition, nor should that service ever attempt to defraud you. Fraud is illegal, and making it so your wheel falls off is criminal negligence. If you can't run your business in such a way that you don't need to resort to fraud or endanger your customers' lives, then you shouldn't be in business in the first place.
Unions work to protect workers from a bad boss. The police work for society at large. Who are they unionizing against? Society at large?
Yes.
No, cyclists and car-haters don't run around telling everyone how they love their 1970s or 1980s car and don't need "all this electronic shit".
Ding ding! Places like that are always looking to upsell, so when you come in for an oil change, they look for something else to sell you, such as an air filter change, a transmission oil change, brake service, etc. Sometimes they even do things like show you a worn belt or filter which isn't even from your car, claiming it is, and saying it needs to be changed.
Unfortunately, many times the monkeys at these service places don't know how to put wheels back on correctly.
MySQL's normal db engine isn't ACID, so if you care about data integrity, PostgreSQL is a better choice. MySQL's innodb engine is ACID, but doesn't perform as well as Postgres. At least that's my understanding of the situation. I honestly don't see the point at all of using a DB that isn't ACID.
Outside sensors are becoming much more commonplace on not-so-expensive cars. I test-drove a Mazda 3 recently (about $27K fully loaded) which had not only a rearview camera, but a blind-spot radar warning system. (I'm not sure if it had parking sonar sensors or not; I didn't get to parallel park it, and a lot of modern parking sensors hide completely behind the bumpers instead of being obvious like in earlier models.)
Rearview cameras will be mandatory in all new cars in a few years. I wouldn't be surprised if blind-spot warning systems follow suit shortly after.
There's been high-end cars for a little while with thermal infrared imaging; I imagine those will be commonplace in another decade or two.
Too late, someone already called it "just another thing to go wrong". It sure seems that these idiotic Slashdotters would rather just drive around in Model Ts. Is there some other site that covers tech news, and actually has techies commenting rather than anti-tech luddites? This site is pathetic.
Yes, because having this system operational is clearly crucial to operation of the vehicle, and you won't be able to just drive without it....
I guess you prefer not having a radio in your car either, since that's "just another thing to go wrong".
The Bay Area is one of the liberal places on the planet. The Fresno area, not so much. Eich isn't living in Fresno or Sacramento, he lives and works in the Bay Area.
This is America; the authorities don't care, and are in bed with the companies they're supposed to be regulating.
I have FIOS available at my house and I opted for Comcast. Why? Simple: price. Comcast is at least $20/month cheaper. I was smart enough to buy my own modem (got it at Target for $50 IIRC, just DOCSIS2 Motorola Surfboard), and other than having to wait several days for a technician to show up for the installation (for some reason they need to send someone, instead of doing it remotely like my own cableco Cox), everything's been working mostly OK.
My neighbors, who had FIOS, had to regularly reboot their FIOS box (which was located in my garage; we share the same property) because the thing was flaky.
You can't upgrade and keep your KDE 3.5
Yes you can. Look up the Trinity project. As long as there's developers who want to fork the project and support it, you can use that DE. It's the same thing that happened with Gnome2/MATE.
If you're a big company running proprietary binaries it becomes more of a challenge to upgrade
Which is a good reason to not run proprietary binaries that are locked to an old kernel/userspace. Regular users don't have this problem since they only run open-source stuff, and companies running their own internal software wouldn't have this problem either. We're mainly talking about individual users here anyway, so the 10-year-old proprietary binary thing shouldn't be an issue there.
If a company doesn't want certain people representing it in public as their public face, which is exactly what the CEO is, they have every right to not place those people as CEOs. CEOs are not normal employees, and in other countries don't even have regular employment contracts (I'd be surprised if they do here in the US too), and are not subject to the same worker protections. There's different rules for people at the top.
If you're CEO and your political beliefs are going to reflect on the company and become the subject of international news stories, yes.
Yes, and the people pushing "separate but equal", with separate bathrooms and water fountains for black people, also didn't exactly say that blacks were subhuman did they?
Maybe, maybe not. If you're a nobody, HR likely doesn't give two shits what political campaigns you donated to, as long as you don't make the national news and drag your company's name into it. If you're a CEO and you make international news because of your political views and donations, expect trouble.
I disagree. There's good reasons for protecting people from discrimination according to certain classes; the whole idea is to prevent classes of people from being stuck in an underclass because no one will employ them.
However, it's also important that people be qualified for the jobs they're in. For instance, discriminating against black people is normally bad, but what if the job is to be a model for clothing targeted at white people, or an actor for a product that only certain white demographics are interested in? Conversely, what if the job is to model hair accessories that only black people would be interested in; should white models be excluded? As far as I know, in jobs like this (modeling, acting), employers have very wide latitude. A black actor isn't going to get very far suing Stephen Spielberg because he couldn't get hired to play the part of Abraham Lincoln, nor would male actor get far suing Spielberg for refusing to cast him as Lincoln's wife.
Eich was not just some low-level worker, he was the CEO (briefly). As such, he's the public face of the company, so his political positions absolutely do reflect on the company as a whole. To me, that means that the company has every right to scrutinize his public political positions, and to remove him if the customer base rebels and decides they hate him and are boycotting the company. The same isn't true of some low-level coder, or the janitor; these people are (more) easily replaced, and aren't paid nearly as much either. Being the top boss of a company carries a big paycheck and a lot of privileges and visibility, but along with that there's downsides, such as a lack of privacy and being subject to the whims of the board. Don't like it? Don't apply for the job. Stay a low-level manager. It's just like being a celebrity. If you're a celebrity making millions of dollars per movie, or an outspoken politician, you have no right to complain that you have no privacy. It's part of the territory. If you value your privacy that much, stay the heck out of the limelight. No one forced you into that job.