If you think banning toothpaste in carry-ons == giving up liberty, you've got some issues... I don't seem to recall a "right to convenient airline flight" in the Bill of Rights, but maybe I overlooked that.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
That means, that the government has no right to even know I have toothpaste, much less to take it away from me, unless they have a warrant or at the least some reasonable probable cause to suspect that I am, in some way, committing a crime (and not simply the suspicion that someone somewhere might be committing a crime).
So yeah, what was that you were saying about being confused?
I'm happy to talk to you, as a human being, but if you use a predictive dialer and an automated recorded message, it's going to piss me off, and I will call the campaign office and express my extreme displeasure.
...and who cares if the car's repairable when everyone in it's dead?
I'm sure you've already got a hundred responses, but I'll throw in my two cents. I have been in two traffic accidents (both many years ago as a young driver). The first accident was in an early 90s Mitsubishi. I hit a tree squarely, head on, going less than ten miles per hour, and the car stopped when the engine hit the tree. The car was totally demolished. To give you an idea of the situation, I was just pulling out of a parking lot from a full stop, and an SUV decided not to yield the right-of-way, and I decided to veer over off the road, instead of being hit by the SUV. The tree was less than fifteen feet from where I started at a dead stop. And it was a total loss.
The other accident, was in a 1983 Oldsmobile Toronado, a four thousand pound beast of iron and steel. In this car, I was doing the speed limit (thirty-five or forty) on a relatively twisty back road, when I crested a hill, and as it dipped and curved, I hit six inches of standing water that had collected from the previous day's rain. The car hydroplaned, and hit the guardrail on the front left corner at full speed, spun around, hit the guardrail on the other side of the road, before stopping, pointed back in the direction I'd come.
The only damage to the vehicle was that the piston on the bumper was compressed, where I'd first hit the guardrail, and there was no damage in the spot where I'd hit the other guardrail. There was a small crack in the plastic wheel-well cover, but no other damage to the car. I was able to drive it home, without any problem.
Sure, I might have been killed if I wasn't wearing a seatbelt. And sure in a crash at highway speeds, it's good if the car sacrifices itself for you. But at ten miles an hour, a car shouldn't be totaled. And I can't help but think that if I'd been in the Mitsubishi in the second accident, the car would have ended up a ball of debris hanging from a tree, and I probably would have been killed anyway... and even if not, this was before cell phones, and it would have been an awful long walk back to civilization.
Even if it's a bot or open relay for spam, the ISP should investigate it and shut it down. I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see Cox & Comcast show up on that list as they are so unbelievably careless.
FYI - Cox blocks outbound port 25 which largely prevents bots on compromised machines. Culprits in my hosts.allow file: dsl-verizon.net, cable.mindspring.com, adsl.proxad.net and fbx.proax.net, us.xo.net, cable.rogers.net, t-dialin.net, btopenworld.com, t-ipconnect.de, adsl.tpnet.pl, res.rr.com, and hinet.net. Also recently got a lot of garbage from pacbell.net.
Fortunately, I take advantage of RBLs that allow me to automatically reject e-mail connections coming from dynamic IP ranges. Now that is something all ISPs could do.
Some of us have a real hard time reading sans-serif fonts. I also like the existing soft edges a lot better than the harshness of the new design. But like everything else in this world, no one seems to give a damn what I think.
About six months ago, I bought a 50" Hitachi LCD. Previously I had a 43" Hitachi projection HDTV that worked flawlessly for me for five years, and I decided to stick with Hitachi for the new one. My father is now enjoying the old one, which still works flawlessly.
The only sorta "gotcha" with the LCD, is that the fan noise is sort of obnoxious... but I only notice it when there's no other sound in the room -- if I mute the receiver, or when it's cooling off. When my 7.1 surround sound is on (not even cranked up, just on) the noise isn't noticeable.
Also, folks will complain that the bulbs in LCD TVs will burn out. That is true (though it'll be a while)... but it's user-serviceable. That's right, you can pop off the cover and replace the bulb yourself. Bulbs aren't cheap, but if you tend to upgrade all your hardware every three to five years, you only have to do it once (if at all).
Now I'm not saying that LCD is better than DLP, I'm just saying that I've been really happy with my Hitachis, and I give it my "stamp of approval".
I wonder what his religion has to say about breaking the law.
Not sure what his religion is, but I was raised Christian, and there's nothing in my Bible about hacking or intellectual property. Just because the USA has a law on the books about something, it doesn't make it immoral.
When I contacted the social security administration about this, and said "Am I required to give anybody but the government my SSN," their rather unhelpful reply was "No, you're not required to, but the hospital is not required to treat you without it."
I don't pretend to understand all this literary big-word stuff... what I do know is that a female character doesn't have to be hot to kick some ass. Case in point: Metroid. Samus Aran was the classic video-game heroin (who always reminded me a lot of Ripley in Alien). We all cheered for Samus, even though, at first, we didn't know she was a chick because of the suit. But after we found out, we cheered even more. Because deep down, what guy doesn't like to get the crap kicked out of him by a girl?
GMU has an MS in Software Engineering. What do you think of this degree? There don't seem to be alot of degrees like this around the country.
Yes it does. I'm probably not a good person to ask about this. In my experience, getting a MS SWE is a little like getting an MBA. You'll learn about UML, and design paradigms, and QA process, and other stuff that a geek like me finds mind-numbing.
The problem is that if you get this stuff from a classroom without doing it in the real world, one of two things will happen... you'll love it for its own sake, and when you get into the real world, you won't accomplish anything because you'll be so bogged down in the process (I know a number of people that fall in this category), -or- you'll hate it because you can't see its value and either you'll fail out of the program or become discouraged with the notion of software engineering. It certainly won't teach you to be a good programmer (yes, there's a huge difference between being an awesome programmer and being an awesome software engineer -- in most real non-government-clean-room situations you need a bit of both).
On the other hand, if you are in the real world, you'll understand that while these ideals are great, that it is necessary to find a balance between process and results. I definitely don't advocate a hacker approach to software development -- I like solid requirements and I appreciate my QA staff -- but the "ideal" software engineering world will have trouble in a lot of areas.
But... the ISE department has another half: the Information Systems program at GMU has some really cool cutting edge stuff in it, more on the practical side (like data mining)... I almost wish I'd gone that route instead of CS. Almost.
As a graduating computer science student (and long time professional), I was interviewed on this topic by George Mason University's student newspaper. I also wrote a little piece of my own on the declining number of CS students:
I have two perspectives on this -- one, as a veteran software engineer, and two as a computer science student.
I chose computer science because it seemed to make sense, given my job as a software engineer. However, many years of interviewing and hiring have shown me that a computer science degree is not necessarily going to be of any use to a software engineer. The position "software engineer" could mean any number of things. At my company, it requires a wide domain knowledge of different applications, almost none of which are addressed in GMU's computer science program. The computer science program teaches programming at the most rudimentary level, and is not even remotely adequate for a job that requires programming. However, a computer science degree does introduce important concepts that are necessary for understanding the underlying principles of working with computers (even if it isn't presented that way), and also teaches logic and problem solving, which are fundamental to any technical job.
As far as students not choosing computer science, I think there are a number of reasons. At GMU (and my previous university) I used to hear all the time, "oh, there's too much math required for a degree in computer science, I'm switching to a degree in information technology or business information systems, because there's not as much math." Also, when the Internet "bubble" burst, I think a stigma developed, where people don't think they'll be able to find a job in the computer industry when they graduate, or that they won't be able to get the kind of pay that they would like, or have job security.
I think it's a sweeping generalization to say that the US is lacking computer science students. What the US is lacking is individuals who are sincerely interested in developing their technical skills and solving interesting problems for their own sake, rather than people who are trying to find the easiest way into a high paying position that they care very little about -- having worked with both, I'd choose a British Literature major who does programming on her own, just for fun, over a Computer Science major who hates computers, but just wants a high paying job.
Why not? Many countries tax cars with bigger engines more then smaller ones. AND they tax the fuel as well. The end result is cars with equal performance being more economical (in MPG therms) in Europe then in the US. Sure, the rich guys still get their Hummers and Ferraris but (unfortunally for the enviroment) it's their liberty.
I drive a Mustang GT, and I get a whopping 15 mpg in town, and as much as 25 mpg on the highway under ideal conditions. I'd say I average around 16... BUT! I more than likely use VASTLY less fuel than you do. I telecommute, I don't drive during times of high traffic volume for any reason, and I end up driving about 6,000 miles a year.
Some of my friends with their 60 mpg Hybrids give me a hard time, but then after we work out that they have a 40 mile commute, each way, every day, that they drive over 20,000 miles a year... we find that they are using the exact same amount of gas that I am... plus they are putting lots of extra wear and tear on their vehicle, which cost them twice as much to begin with, and adds to the congestion on the road, and their own stress levels for having to spend over two hours a day in a car!
So yeah, I say raise the gas tax... make it $5 a gallon. I might cut back on my driving a little bit more -- walk or bike to the store, instead of drive, perhaps... but I can still enjoy my sports car when the weather's nice, and the traffic is light, and the folks who make the DC area roads hell by commuting will pay the price for living so far from where they work.
Oh yeah, one last thing... it's not just the "rich" folks with Hummers and Ferraris... damn near everyone has some sort of SUV or Minivan that gets under 25 mpg. Even a Honda Accord only gets 20-25 mpg around town! And for the most part, you have to be richer to drive an efficient Hybrid than you do to drive an old Cutlass.
So if you want to raise the fuel tax, great. But if you want to raise the tax on "gas guzzlers", you need to do a few things first: 1) lower the cost of hybrids (or better yet, find a low cost alternative)... 2) make fuel efficient cars that don't look like something out of the Jetsons... I'd drive a hybrid Mustang... but a Prius?? I wouldn't drive it even if it did 0-60 in 3.8 seconds!
And that's to say nothing of improving public transportation... anyway </rant>
These things will NEVER be completely secure. Someone will always figure a way to hack them.
Eventually, folks will realize, that no matter how hard you try, you will never be completely safe: even if you become a shut-in. We just have to accept that life is terminal and it has inherit risks. Without those risks, life would be waaayy to fucking boring - for me anyway!
I have a solution... why don't we not try to track every human being on the planet. There's no possibility of the info being leaked if the info is never gathered and used. If you want to scan me for explosives or whatever before I get on a plane, fine... if you have drug sensors or whatever, fine. But you don't need to know who I am or why I'm traveling. My business is my own.
The burden of proof is on the RIAA. They are the ones that are accusing her of downloading music illegally. Now, just because it's her computer doesn't matter; It's like accusing someone getting killed by a gun. Simply showing ownership of who the gun belongs to is not enough to show who done it.
I'm not a lawyer, but in civil litigation, isn't it the responsibility of the defendant to prove that the plaintiff's claim is invalid? And then, it's only based on a preponderance of evidance, not beyond a reasonable doubt.
So basically, if you get sued, it's up to you to convince the judge or jury that it's at least 51% likely that you shouldn't be assigned liability for the claim.
The rules favor the plaintiff, not the defendant, unlike in criminal law. At least, that's what I recall from my cyber-law class.
Although I would really hate to see what would happen if the US tried to institute a *real* airport security system like the Israelis have, rather than the "security theatre" that we have, I found it very impressive.
The only worse thing I can imagine than the farse that is American airport security, is the possibility that some day they might actually successfully implement true security. I thought society was taking a step forward since you no longer need papers to travel inside Russia, or passports to go between France and Germany. I dread travelling now, because it offends me to have to take off my shoes and belt at the airport to maintain the illusion of security. But how much worse would it be when they confiscate my laptop because I could make an explosive from the battery in about three seconds? Or when I'm detained indefinitely because I'm a 20-something travelling alone, and I happen to be carrying a Quoran for some leisure reading.
In my life, terror doesn't come from desperate fundamentalists. Terror is the government trying to control every aspect of the way I live and the way I think. I can only hope that it's not too late to undo the damage. Vote while you still can! And pray, if you're into that sort of thing.
Thank you! I'm sick of people with their Civics and 30 mile commutes giving me a hard time for having a Mustang GT with a big V8. Sure I only get 16 miles to the gallon... but I work from home nearly every day, and I take public transportation whenever it is available. As a result, I only drive about 5000 miles a year, and I never have to worry about the price of gas.
Rob, I feel your pain -- I know there are many many bziman's out there (including both of my parents), but I still feel possessive about it. It also irks me when I see people using handles that clearly don't belong to them, like Slashdot's CommanderTaco. What a dumbass. But rest assured, the dorks at Blizzard probably read Slashdot, and unlike most of our petty whining, your arguments will probably be heard.
Oh, and don't listen to anyone who compares WoW's GMs with Slashdot's moderation system. Tell me, does WoW have meta-GMs??? If one GM slaps you down, can two more GMs bring you back up? Slashdot is really the only discussion site on the web worth looking at, despite the occasional misspelling or duplicate post, and it is all due to your moderation system.
I don't know about the mutant 100 kilo pack-hunting raptors in Jurassic Park... but in real life, velociraptors were like 20 kilos. That's a bit bigger than your average house cat, and might be able to do a little damage to an unsuspecting human, but in the land of dinosaurs, this scary predator would most likely need to be scraped off the bottom of the foot of your average large herbivore.
Re:Does anyone else find myth busters annoying?
on
Archimedes Death Ray
·
· Score: 1
Yeah... but that's because their expertise is special effects, not science. But they are brilliant at rapid prototyping. I keep debating whether I should apply for the job of Chief Sanity Check Officer, to make sure that what they're doing isn't completely braindead -- like with the enormous crane catapult. Everyone was surprised when Buster went like ten feet. Well duh... Buster is going to leave the basket on a tangent trajectory to the path of the crane... when the basket STOPS (because otherwise it can't get out). So either they needed to make a break-away basket that allows buster to exit near the top of the path, or they need to stop the crane's motion near the top. That experiment was the most painful example of a huge build that was really cool that failed because they forgot about high school physics.
Their hiring bar for college/university grads is pretty low. You have no experience to speak of, so you're a clean slate, nobody expects any miracles from you. Now if you HAVE worked somewhere before things change pretty drastically for you. Folks who interview you expect experience and knowledge. You're more likely to get tough problems to solve in each 1 hour session. If you don't solve them, or at least don't stumble upon the correct path to solve them, you won't be hired.
Um, I'm a veteran senior software engineer with unique experience in the area they were hiring for -- my educational background wasn't relevent and isn't listed on my resume.
As for the rigorousness of the interview -- it lasted for eight hours. In fact, at 5:00 as I was waiting for the last interviewer, the receptionist asked why I was still there, and when I told her I was waiting for the final interviewer, she said, oh that's funny, because they sent everyone else home two hours ago.
So, I don't think it's so much that the interview was too easy, as much as it was that my style of problem solving made it painless for me.
Why is this? I don't know. I think the consensus is that folks who have worked elsewhere are "tainted", and it's hard to re-program them to accept MSFT culture. So unless you really kick ass, your chances are pretty slim if you worked anywhere else.
Well, let's see, I was one of the earliest employees of an Internet startup eight years ago, which has now grown to nearly a thousand people. I helped build the culture at my company. I don't think Microsoft feels the need to re-program people that have always been a part of a culture where raw brain power is valued.
If the culture at your companies values something else, then I can imagine how Microsoft might shy away from you, unless you can show yourself to be a real stand out.
So, I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but your comments don't seem apply in this case.
Last summer, I had the opportunity to interview at Microsoft after they found my resume online and called me. I must say truthfully that of all of the companies that have called me, Microsoft was the very first one who read my resume and understand what I actually DO and wanted me to interview for a job that actually makes sense for my skill set.
Their phone interview process was a good mix of explaining what it is they were doing and how I could help, and making sure that I was the right mix of skills and cleverness to fit in with the group.
I passed that round, and was invited to Redmond to interview in person. I found the whole on-site interview process to be a lot of fun -- I'd heard that the interview process was gruelling, painful, challenging, etc... but I thought it was fun. And shortly thereafter, they offered me the position.
Fully half the time I've spent talking to Microsoft has been on the topic of what they have to offer me, and it was considerable.
In the end, I decided not to relocate to Redmond, mainly because I wanted to finish up my BS (three semesters to go at the time, now one more), which I'd been working on part time for eight years, while working as a software engineer.
So I guess in the end, if you don't enjoy that kind of interview, maybe you're not really qualified, despite your education. There are plenty of places where all the cleverness in the world is worthless, but the skills required to earn that PhD are essential (I can't imagine working in an evironment like that... but hey, each unto their own).
Personally, I found the whole experience to be very positive, and if after I finish my BS, the PhD doesn't work out, I might be taking that permanent trip to Redmond after all.
Just today, I got a letter from an affiliate of Sears Credit (which was acquired by citi) who insured my line of credit. But I close all my accounts with them ages ago (because I try my best to avoid doing business with citi because of their predatory marketing tactics). So today, I called them up and asked them why my info was even still in their system. They acknowledged that the letter was a system glitch and that it was a duplicate of a letter they mailed me ages ago when I closed my account (which is plausible), and then explained that they are *required* by Federal Law (I think he quoted the Fair Credit and Reporting Act) to keep all of my personal info, including my SSN on record for seven years.
There is definitely something wrong with this system! I'm all for doing without consumer credit, but it's simply not feasible.
Perhaps we need a public-key style scheme where we generate a unique private key that we use to encrypt things like credit card applications, and then the public key is on file with the government and credit card companies and the like. That way only we have access to important private information, but the credit reporting agencies and the government can still keep track of us the way they do currently.
This would beat the hell out of biometrics and nonsense like that (you can't bloody send someone a retina scan over the internet or through the mail!), and it would do something to improve our privacy by preventing people from faking your identity.
Slashdot Mirror
If you don't like, you don't have to buy it, but don't ruin it for the rest of us whores. Wait a minute...
See US Constitution: Fourth Amendment:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
That means, that the government has no right to even know I have toothpaste, much less to take it away from me, unless they have a warrant or at the least some reasonable probable cause to suspect that I am, in some way, committing a crime (and not simply the suspicion that someone somewhere might be committing a crime).
So yeah, what was that you were saying about being confused?
I'm happy to talk to you, as a human being, but if you use a predictive dialer and an automated recorded message, it's going to piss me off, and I will call the campaign office and express my extreme displeasure.
I'm sure you've already got a hundred responses, but I'll throw in my two cents. I have been in two traffic accidents (both many years ago as a young driver). The first accident was in an early 90s Mitsubishi. I hit a tree squarely, head on, going less than ten miles per hour, and the car stopped when the engine hit the tree. The car was totally demolished. To give you an idea of the situation, I was just pulling out of a parking lot from a full stop, and an SUV decided not to yield the right-of-way, and I decided to veer over off the road, instead of being hit by the SUV. The tree was less than fifteen feet from where I started at a dead stop. And it was a total loss.
The other accident, was in a 1983 Oldsmobile Toronado, a four thousand pound beast of iron and steel. In this car, I was doing the speed limit (thirty-five or forty) on a relatively twisty back road, when I crested a hill, and as it dipped and curved, I hit six inches of standing water that had collected from the previous day's rain. The car hydroplaned, and hit the guardrail on the front left corner at full speed, spun around, hit the guardrail on the other side of the road, before stopping, pointed back in the direction I'd come.
The only damage to the vehicle was that the piston on the bumper was compressed, where I'd first hit the guardrail, and there was no damage in the spot where I'd hit the other guardrail. There was a small crack in the plastic wheel-well cover, but no other damage to the car. I was able to drive it home, without any problem.
Sure, I might have been killed if I wasn't wearing a seatbelt. And sure in a crash at highway speeds, it's good if the car sacrifices itself for you. But at ten miles an hour, a car shouldn't be totaled. And I can't help but think that if I'd been in the Mitsubishi in the second accident, the car would have ended up a ball of debris hanging from a tree, and I probably would have been killed anyway... and even if not, this was before cell phones, and it would have been an awful long walk back to civilization.
--brianFYI - Cox blocks outbound port 25 which largely prevents bots on compromised machines. Culprits in my hosts.allow file: dsl-verizon.net, cable.mindspring.com, adsl.proxad.net and fbx.proax.net, us.xo.net, cable.rogers.net, t-dialin.net, btopenworld.com, t-ipconnect.de, adsl.tpnet.pl, res.rr.com, and hinet.net. Also recently got a lot of garbage from pacbell.net.
Fortunately, I take advantage of RBLs that allow me to automatically reject e-mail connections coming from dynamic IP ranges. Now that is something all ISPs could do.
-brianSome of us have a real hard time reading sans-serif fonts. I also like the existing soft edges a lot better than the harshness of the new design. But like everything else in this world, no one seems to give a damn what I think.
The only sorta "gotcha" with the LCD, is that the fan noise is sort of obnoxious... but I only notice it when there's no other sound in the room -- if I mute the receiver, or when it's cooling off. When my 7.1 surround sound is on (not even cranked up, just on) the noise isn't noticeable.
Also, folks will complain that the bulbs in LCD TVs will burn out. That is true (though it'll be a while)... but it's user-serviceable. That's right, you can pop off the cover and replace the bulb yourself. Bulbs aren't cheap, but if you tend to upgrade all your hardware every three to five years, you only have to do it once (if at all).
Now I'm not saying that LCD is better than DLP, I'm just saying that I've been really happy with my Hitachis, and I give it my "stamp of approval".
--brian
I don't pretend to understand all this literary big-word stuff... what I do know is that a female character doesn't have to be hot to kick some ass. Case in point: Metroid. Samus Aran was the classic video-game heroin (who always reminded me a lot of Ripley in Alien). We all cheered for Samus, even though, at first, we didn't know she was a chick because of the suit. But after we found out, we cheered even more. Because deep down, what guy doesn't like to get the crap kicked out of him by a girl?
Yes it does. I'm probably not a good person to ask about this. In my experience, getting a MS SWE is a little like getting an MBA. You'll learn about UML, and design paradigms, and QA process, and other stuff that a geek like me finds mind-numbing.
The problem is that if you get this stuff from a classroom without doing it in the real world, one of two things will happen... you'll love it for its own sake, and when you get into the real world, you won't accomplish anything because you'll be so bogged down in the process (I know a number of people that fall in this category), -or- you'll hate it because you can't see its value and either you'll fail out of the program or become discouraged with the notion of software engineering. It certainly won't teach you to be a good programmer (yes, there's a huge difference between being an awesome programmer and being an awesome software engineer -- in most real non-government-clean-room situations you need a bit of both).
On the other hand, if you are in the real world, you'll understand that while these ideals are great, that it is necessary to find a balance between process and results. I definitely don't advocate a hacker approach to software development -- I like solid requirements and I appreciate my QA staff -- but the "ideal" software engineering world will have trouble in a lot of areas.
But... the ISE department has another half: the Information Systems program at GMU has some really cool cutting edge stuff in it, more on the practical side (like data mining)... I almost wish I'd gone that route instead of CS. Almost.
--brian
As a graduating computer science student (and long time professional), I was interviewed on this topic by George Mason University's student newspaper. I also wrote a little piece of my own on the declining number of CS students:
I have two perspectives on this -- one, as a veteran software engineer, and two as a computer science student.
I chose computer science because it seemed to make sense, given my job as a software engineer. However, many years of interviewing and hiring have shown me that a computer science degree is not necessarily going to be of any use to a software engineer. The position "software engineer" could mean any number of things. At my company, it requires a wide domain knowledge of different applications, almost none of which are addressed in GMU's computer science program. The computer science program teaches programming at the most rudimentary level, and is not even remotely adequate for a job that requires programming. However, a computer science degree does introduce important concepts that are necessary for understanding the underlying principles of working with computers (even if it isn't presented that way), and also teaches logic and problem solving, which are fundamental to any technical job.
As far as students not choosing computer science, I think there are a number of reasons. At GMU (and my previous university) I used to hear all the time, "oh, there's too much math required for a degree in computer science, I'm switching to a degree in information technology or business information systems, because there's not as much math." Also, when the Internet "bubble" burst, I think a stigma developed, where people don't think they'll be able to find a job in the computer industry when they graduate, or that they won't be able to get the kind of pay that they would like, or have job security.
I think it's a sweeping generalization to say that the US is lacking computer science students. What the US is lacking is individuals who are sincerely interested in developing their technical skills and solving interesting problems for their own sake, rather than people who are trying to find the easiest way into a high paying position that they care very little about -- having worked with both, I'd choose a British Literature major who does programming on her own, just for fun, over a Computer Science major who hates computers, but just wants a high paying job.
--brian
Um... this isn't sci-fi... I had all of my molars sealed when I was a kid. Dental Sealant has been around since the 1970s.
--brian
I drive a Mustang GT, and I get a whopping 15 mpg in town, and as much as 25 mpg on the highway under ideal conditions. I'd say I average around 16... BUT! I more than likely use VASTLY less fuel than you do. I telecommute, I don't drive during times of high traffic volume for any reason, and I end up driving about 6,000 miles a year.
Some of my friends with their 60 mpg Hybrids give me a hard time, but then after we work out that they have a 40 mile commute, each way, every day, that they drive over 20,000 miles a year... we find that they are using the exact same amount of gas that I am... plus they are putting lots of extra wear and tear on their vehicle, which cost them twice as much to begin with, and adds to the congestion on the road, and their own stress levels for having to spend over two hours a day in a car!
So yeah, I say raise the gas tax... make it $5 a gallon. I might cut back on my driving a little bit more -- walk or bike to the store, instead of drive, perhaps... but I can still enjoy my sports car when the weather's nice, and the traffic is light, and the folks who make the DC area roads hell by commuting will pay the price for living so far from where they work.
Oh yeah, one last thing... it's not just the "rich" folks with Hummers and Ferraris... damn near everyone has some sort of SUV or Minivan that gets under 25 mpg. Even a Honda Accord only gets 20-25 mpg around town! And for the most part, you have to be richer to drive an efficient Hybrid than you do to drive an old Cutlass.
So if you want to raise the fuel tax, great. But if you want to raise the tax on "gas guzzlers", you need to do a few things first: 1) lower the cost of hybrids (or better yet, find a low cost alternative)... 2) make fuel efficient cars that don't look like something out of the Jetsons... I'd drive a hybrid Mustang... but a Prius?? I wouldn't drive it even if it did 0-60 in 3.8 seconds!
And that's to say nothing of improving public transportation... anyway </rant>
-brian
I'm not a lawyer, but in civil litigation, isn't it the responsibility of the defendant to prove that the plaintiff's claim is invalid? And then, it's only based on a preponderance of evidance, not beyond a reasonable doubt.
So basically, if you get sued, it's up to you to convince the judge or jury that it's at least 51% likely that you shouldn't be assigned liability for the claim.
The rules favor the plaintiff, not the defendant, unlike in criminal law. At least, that's what I recall from my cyber-law class.
-brian
The only worse thing I can imagine than the farse that is American airport security, is the possibility that some day they might actually successfully implement true security. I thought society was taking a step forward since you no longer need papers to travel inside Russia, or passports to go between France and Germany. I dread travelling now, because it offends me to have to take off my shoes and belt at the airport to maintain the illusion of security. But how much worse would it be when they confiscate my laptop because I could make an explosive from the battery in about three seconds? Or when I'm detained indefinitely because I'm a 20-something travelling alone, and I happen to be carrying a Quoran for some leisure reading.
In my life, terror doesn't come from desperate fundamentalists. Terror is the government trying to control every aspect of the way I live and the way I think. I can only hope that it's not too late to undo the damage. Vote while you still can! And pray, if you're into that sort of thing.
Thank you! I'm sick of people with their Civics and 30 mile commutes giving me a hard time for having a Mustang GT with a big V8. Sure I only get 16 miles to the gallon... but I work from home nearly every day, and I take public transportation whenever it is available. As a result, I only drive about 5000 miles a year, and I never have to worry about the price of gas.
Oh, and don't listen to anyone who compares WoW's GMs with Slashdot's moderation system. Tell me, does WoW have meta-GMs??? If one GM slaps you down, can two more GMs bring you back up? Slashdot is really the only discussion site on the web worth looking at, despite the occasional misspelling or duplicate post, and it is all due to your moderation system.
Party on!
-Brian
I don't know about the mutant 100 kilo pack-hunting raptors in Jurassic Park... but in real life, velociraptors were like 20 kilos. That's a bit bigger than your average house cat, and might be able to do a little damage to an unsuspecting human, but in the land of dinosaurs, this scary predator would most likely need to be scraped off the bottom of the foot of your average large herbivore.
Yeah... but that's because their expertise is special effects, not science. But they are brilliant at rapid prototyping. I keep debating whether I should apply for the job of Chief Sanity Check Officer, to make sure that what they're doing isn't completely braindead -- like with the enormous crane catapult. Everyone was surprised when Buster went like ten feet. Well duh... Buster is going to leave the basket on a tangent trajectory to the path of the crane... when the basket STOPS (because otherwise it can't get out). So either they needed to make a break-away basket that allows buster to exit near the top of the path, or they need to stop the crane's motion near the top. That experiment was the most painful example of a huge build that was really cool that failed because they forgot about high school physics.
As for the rigorousness of the interview -- it lasted for eight hours. In fact, at 5:00 as I was waiting for the last interviewer, the receptionist asked why I was still there, and when I told her I was waiting for the final interviewer, she said, oh that's funny, because they sent everyone else home two hours ago.
So, I don't think it's so much that the interview was too easy, as much as it was that my style of problem solving made it painless for me.
Well, let's see, I was one of the earliest employees of an Internet startup eight years ago, which has now grown to nearly a thousand people. I helped build the culture at my company. I don't think Microsoft feels the need to re-program people that have always been a part of a culture where raw brain power is valued.
If the culture at your companies values something else, then I can imagine how Microsoft might shy away from you, unless you can show yourself to be a real stand out.
So, I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but your comments don't seem apply in this case.
--brian
Their phone interview process was a good mix of explaining what it is they were doing and how I could help, and making sure that I was the right mix of skills and cleverness to fit in with the group.
I passed that round, and was invited to Redmond to interview in person. I found the whole on-site interview process to be a lot of fun -- I'd heard that the interview process was gruelling, painful, challenging, etc... but I thought it was fun. And shortly thereafter, they offered me the position.
Fully half the time I've spent talking to Microsoft has been on the topic of what they have to offer me, and it was considerable.
In the end, I decided not to relocate to Redmond, mainly because I wanted to finish up my BS (three semesters to go at the time, now one more), which I'd been working on part time for eight years, while working as a software engineer.
So I guess in the end, if you don't enjoy that kind of interview, maybe you're not really qualified, despite your education. There are plenty of places where all the cleverness in the world is worthless, but the skills required to earn that PhD are essential (I can't imagine working in an evironment like that... but hey, each unto their own).
Personally, I found the whole experience to be very positive, and if after I finish my BS, the PhD doesn't work out, I might be taking that permanent trip to Redmond after all.
-brian
...as long as it doesn't affect the real important event of the day... the release of the new Harry Potter book!
There is definitely something wrong with this system! I'm all for doing without consumer credit, but it's simply not feasible.
Perhaps we need a public-key style scheme where we generate a unique private key that we use to encrypt things like credit card applications, and then the public key is on file with the government and credit card companies and the like. That way only we have access to important private information, but the credit reporting agencies and the government can still keep track of us the way they do currently.
This would beat the hell out of biometrics and nonsense like that (you can't bloody send someone a retina scan over the internet or through the mail!), and it would do something to improve our privacy by preventing people from faking your identity.