I see you still don't understand the concept of ubiquitousness. That means almost ALL. Get it.
I'm not saying some can't do it.
I'm not saying some can't learn it.
I never said don't teach it.
You completely don't comprehend what I'm saying. You keep arguing upon the value of the single entity when the statement was regarding ubiquity. You can't even fathom what that concept means because your view won't let you get past the misperceived slight on teenagers.
Teenagers lack scope and experience. Since they lack this scope and experience they make mistakes. Get a large chunk of the teen population doing something that REQUIRES experience before you are any good at it and that activity will dramatically drop in its quality.
Anything teens do en masse usually sucks in quality because they're only channeling raw talent or knack. They don't posses anywhere close to the capabilities required to function on a professional or par level. Here are some examples.
Teen artists lack the emotional experience or physical control to create masterworks, but a few can create good work. In general teen artists suck donkey balls.
Teen drama students lack the emotional experience or subject matter comprehension in order to act well. Some can act on a greater level, most teen drama productions suck.
Teen athletes lack the physical development and the field time in order to play sports well. Some can play well enough to go pro, depending on the sport. Most teen sports teams suck.
See a pattern. These are widely accepted behaviors for teens to undergo, and are required experiences for these teens to get better at what they want. Notice that in none of these activities are ubiquitous amongst teens. They are present but not common amongst all teens. Not all teens do art, act, or play sports. Ubiquitous, look it up.
Now, lets take assume that any one of these activities has become ubiquitous. The overall quality of available examples of these activities would drop. Wanna know why? Because teenagers simply cannot function on a high level across the board.
You want to know what is ubiquitous amongst teenagers?
There constant ignorance and their complete lack of self recognition. You have no idea that everything you have previously posted not only has absolutely no bearing on my original statement, but also holds a striking resemblance to smart people arguing stupid shit because they are accustomed to being right.
If you are going to respond to me again, please at least comprehend my statement or you won't be worth even trying to educate, which coincidentally is the least amount of respect and regard I can have for a living thing.
There is a difference between steroids (modding to cheat) and practice time.
While the end result may be the same insofar as those who have more time play better, whining about your circumstance and complaining that you can't compete is pretty pathetic.
Man, this has been going on FOR A LONG TIME. Just think of all the people who absentmindedly hand their Credit Card or Debit card to wait staff at dining establishments. A disproportionate amount of cloned numbers source from these places.
I suggest you look up the term ubiquitous, reference the original statement I made, and then reread your last post. You go from defending all teenagers to the invariable one who might make something worth a damn. You're point is invalid in the framework of the argument and your logic is based on justifying your feelings more than making a cohesive point.
It's obvious that you don't know what you don't know, and that is the most dangerous form of ignorance there is.
We're not talking about problem solving skills, we're talking about programming skills.
NO ONE does it right in the beginning. Make programming ubiquitous, by making the development tools low entry, and you get a bunch of crap code and programs. That's the bottom line.
You're argument is emotional and shows that you yourself are a teenager, or at least not very experienced or mature. This type of thinking, emotions substituting for experience, is what will lead to programming process mistakes.
While you may or may not fall into this category, I can say with great assurance that if programming becomes a regular thing with teenagers across the board you will see variables named after the seven dwarves or anime characters. You will see spaghetti code that would make a Gordian know look simple, and you will probably see the lack of understanding the concepts relative to user experience. Hell, seasoned engineers make this mistake.
You fail to recognize what has to happen culturally for programming to become ubiquitous in the teenage demographic. People aren't going to suddenly become hip to how computer programming and logic works. Personality doesn't work that way. In order for teens to start programming en masse you would have to lower the barrier to entry. That's the same thing as saying let people who don't quite understand it jumble it together.
But lets assume that for some miraculous reason, teens suddenly become attuned to programming logic and logic structures. Lets assume that every teen in grades 9 - 12 in the US now understands how to program.
They still lack the knowledge in proper design (interface and architecture), algorithmic math, and packaging and distribution options. Learning to program is just scratching the surface. There are parallel disciplines that can only be understood in reference to programming by experience. The education process CAN NOT instill this knowledge.
So, a large influx of inexperienced programmers using low entry tools will have a negative effect on the quality of work.
Well, I haven't checked in a while but there was another group of users - graphic artists. Now, I know most of these guys use Macs but there is a group who do prefer windows and the lack of a Vector based image program and support for CMYK or Pantone colors was unacceptable.
Although, these issues may have been addressed by now. And if so - off to OSS land I go!
You are given a free report once a year per agency in the US.
You are being charged for the service of monitoring and updating you on a regular basis. You billed for your credit score, it is your score. These agencies are in business to track and monitor these scores for other business entities. They charge for this service. If you want the service extended to you, you pay for it.
You aren't purchasing a thing when you pay for your report, you are purchasing the service of reporting it to you. Big difference.
Why is this a troll? Bullies choose victims, not easy targets.
Standing up for yourself works. You may get beat up, perhaps repeatedly while you defend yourself, but eventually the bully stops.
Bullies will never be removed from your existence, learning how to deal with them is a survival skill.
Now, there is another problem to be dealt with. Can you tell the difference between a bully and a sociopath with narcissistic tendencies? A bully will capitulate when the reward for picking on you becomes less than the effort put into it.
A narcissistic sociopath will continue to beat on you harder and harder until you recognize the level of superiority that exists in their head.
There is a difference between a Rock Star and an Artist. They choose to be Rock Stars, not Artists. The mindset that you deserve to be paid for doing something you like is ridiculous. That's a perfect world scenario.
I work with a ton of bands, I know a decent amount of A/R guys - and I see this type of thing every day. I have yet to feel sorry for a band who gets woo'd with false fame.
They sell out, plain and simple. Its no longer about the art, and the "artist" knows it. They go for the fame.
Its unbelievable how those who take personal accountability seriously are ridiculed by others for being blind of their own victimization.
There is a huge difference between attaining self reliance and being a bully. I often find those who can't understand that are often the first ones to cry "I'm a victim" when they aren't.
While true cases a being victimized do exist, they are no where close to as ubiquitous as our whiny as culture would lead you to believe.
There is very rarely a situation where I would get run over where more diligence on my part wouldn't have swayed the outcome of an accident.
If a genocidal political regime puts me into a detention camp I chose to let them do it to me instead of killing me while I resist.
If I get mugged, it's because I didn't properly prepare myself for violent crime - or wasn't willing to take the necessary precautions to prevent it.
It is a matter of personal perspective.
I've never been a victim. Quite often I think people who claim to be victims do so when choices they made in their life didn't live up to expectations or a small percentage chance event occurred in place of normal events.
Since the student who created the MySpace profile tried to make it look like this was a profile created by the principal, I'd say what he did also borders on identity theft.
You're kidding right? Identity theft requires you hijack an ID to accomplish some goal under the auspice of that ID. Please tell me one thing these students accomplished while posing as their principal?
All these kids have to say is that their stuff was parody. Happens all the time in other forms of media. Hell, people make good livings impersonating other famous people and doing things out of character. Is that identy theft?
Parody doesn't have to me nice. It can be malicious as hell.
True, the hourly guy could be making more money - but that's not all there is to compensation.
The ability to influence actual change is worth more than money to some. I know that I am more than willing to "lose" a few dollars an hour in order to be given free reign to implement my ideas on a large scale. If my ideas work I am in a much better position to be given more critical tasks and matching compensation.
Some companies don't give this freedom to hourlies.
I know that the paid breaks as a postal worker did not come from the US Government being nice. They were a result of Postal Worker Unions negotiating benefits.
Labor Unions have forced a lot of companies into giving their hourly employees benefits not mandated by law.
What's strange is that there was a loss of prestige of sorts.
That's a really interesting point. I think the loss of prestige is a major factor of grumbling. Although I cannot determine if being classified as hourly is the source of the issue or if the rank and file hourly archetype is to blame.
At every company I have ever worked for, the hourlies rarely took any initiative to change anything. There were always plenty of complaints from this group, but rarely were there any potential solutions offered.
Was this a side effect of being an hourly worker? Did they feel they had no leverage or voice to influence change? Did they feel that their job classification put their jobs on a precipice and rocking the boat might get them fired?
Does being classified as an hourly worker limit your growth potential in a company? That varies by company to company, but I can understand how the perception might be that it would. I can see discontentment arising out of having a ceiling thrown on your career ladder, even if that ceiling is just a perception.
That's the law. If you are classified as an hourly worker you MUST take at least a 30 minute lunch break and have a 15 minute break for every 4 hours you work. Overtime is also regulated in a similar way.
Slashdot Mirror
In what jurisdiction?
How about the jurisdiction that the local data center is serving pages to?
I mean come on, these guy's want to index the worlds information but they can't manage a subject to local rules table?
I see you still don't understand the concept of ubiquitousness. That means almost ALL. Get it.
I'm not saying some can't do it.
I'm not saying some can't learn it.
I never said don't teach it.
You completely don't comprehend what I'm saying. You keep arguing upon the value of the single entity when the statement was regarding ubiquity. You can't even fathom what that concept means because your view won't let you get past the misperceived slight on teenagers.
Teenagers lack scope and experience. Since they lack this scope and experience they make mistakes. Get a large chunk of the teen population doing something that REQUIRES experience before you are any good at it and that activity will dramatically drop in its quality.
Anything teens do en masse usually sucks in quality because they're only channeling raw talent or knack. They don't posses anywhere close to the capabilities required to function on a professional or par level. Here are some examples.
Teen artists lack the emotional experience or physical control to create masterworks, but a few can create good work. In general teen artists suck donkey balls.
Teen drama students lack the emotional experience or subject matter comprehension in order to act well. Some can act on a greater level, most teen drama productions suck.
Teen athletes lack the physical development and the field time in order to play sports well. Some can play well enough to go pro, depending on the sport. Most teen sports teams suck.
See a pattern. These are widely accepted behaviors for teens to undergo, and are required experiences for these teens to get better at what they want. Notice that in none of these activities are ubiquitous amongst teens. They are present but not common amongst all teens. Not all teens do art, act, or play sports. Ubiquitous, look it up.
Now, lets take assume that any one of these activities has become ubiquitous. The overall quality of available examples of these activities would drop. Wanna know why? Because teenagers simply cannot function on a high level across the board.
You want to know what is ubiquitous amongst teenagers?
There constant ignorance and their complete lack of self recognition. You have no idea that everything you have previously posted not only has absolutely no bearing on my original statement, but also holds a striking resemblance to smart people arguing stupid shit because they are accustomed to being right.
If you are going to respond to me again, please at least comprehend my statement or you won't be worth even trying to educate, which coincidentally is the least amount of respect and regard I can have for a living thing.
There is a difference between steroids (modding to cheat) and practice time.
While the end result may be the same insofar as those who have more time play better, whining about your circumstance and complaining that you can't compete is pretty pathetic.
Man, this has been going on FOR A LONG TIME. Just think of all the people who absentmindedly hand their Credit Card or Debit card to wait staff at dining establishments. A disproportionate amount of cloned numbers source from these places.
I suggest you look up the term ubiquitous, reference the original statement I made, and then reread your last post. You go from defending all teenagers to the invariable one who might make something worth a damn. You're point is invalid in the framework of the argument and your logic is based on justifying your feelings more than making a cohesive point.
It's obvious that you don't know what you don't know, and that is the most dangerous form of ignorance there is.
We're not talking about problem solving skills, we're talking about programming skills.
NO ONE does it right in the beginning. Make programming ubiquitous, by making the development tools low entry, and you get a bunch of crap code and programs. That's the bottom line.
You're argument is emotional and shows that you yourself are a teenager, or at least not very experienced or mature. This type of thinking, emotions substituting for experience, is what will lead to programming process mistakes.
While you may or may not fall into this category, I can say with great assurance that if programming becomes a regular thing with teenagers across the board you will see variables named after the seven dwarves or anime characters. You will see spaghetti code that would make a Gordian know look simple, and you will probably see the lack of understanding the concepts relative to user experience. Hell, seasoned engineers make this mistake.
You fail to recognize what has to happen culturally for programming to become ubiquitous in the teenage demographic. People aren't going to suddenly become hip to how computer programming and logic works. Personality doesn't work that way. In order for teens to start programming en masse you would have to lower the barrier to entry. That's the same thing as saying let people who don't quite understand it jumble it together.
But lets assume that for some miraculous reason, teens suddenly become attuned to programming logic and logic structures. Lets assume that every teen in grades 9 - 12 in the US now understands how to program.
They still lack the knowledge in proper design (interface and architecture), algorithmic math, and packaging and distribution options. Learning to program is just scratching the surface. There are parallel disciplines that can only be understood in reference to programming by experience. The education process CAN NOT instill this knowledge.
So, a large influx of inexperienced programmers using low entry tools will have a negative effect on the quality of work.
Because a teenager lacks scope or experience.
What is useful or fun to a teenager is not necessarily useful or fun to an adult male in their 40's.
Actually, I assume that the instant OSS development becomes ubiquitous in the teenage demographic that the OSS community is going to pretty much suck.
Well, I haven't checked in a while but there was another group of users - graphic artists. Now, I know most of these guys use Macs but there is a group who do prefer windows and the lack of a Vector based image program and support for CMYK or Pantone colors was unacceptable.
Although, these issues may have been addressed by now. And if so - off to OSS land I go!
I'd have to say that I half agree with you.
Internet petitions do nothing today.
Internet petitions after two generations of people have grown up with the internet as a full lifespan reality should be fairly effective.
You are given a free report once a year per agency in the US.
You are being charged for the service of monitoring and updating you on a regular basis. You billed for your credit score, it is your score. These agencies are in business to track and monitor these scores for other business entities. They charge for this service. If you want the service extended to you, you pay for it.
You aren't purchasing a thing when you pay for your report, you are purchasing the service of reporting it to you. Big difference.
Why should I have to monitor everything?
uhhhh, because its YOUR CREDIT. Seriously, this attitude is part of the problem. Who do you want to be in charge of monitoring your credit?
Why is this a troll? Bullies choose victims, not easy targets.
Standing up for yourself works. You may get beat up, perhaps repeatedly while you defend yourself, but eventually the bully stops.
Bullies will never be removed from your existence, learning how to deal with them is a survival skill.
Now, there is another problem to be dealt with. Can you tell the difference between a bully and a sociopath with narcissistic tendencies? A bully will capitulate when the reward for picking on you becomes less than the effort put into it.
A narcissistic sociopath will continue to beat on you harder and harder until you recognize the level of superiority that exists in their head.
There is a difference between a Rock Star and an Artist. They choose to be Rock Stars, not Artists. The mindset that you deserve to be paid for doing something you like is ridiculous. That's a perfect world scenario.
I work with a ton of bands, I know a decent amount of A/R guys - and I see this type of thing every day. I have yet to feel sorry for a band who gets woo'd with false fame.
They sell out, plain and simple. Its no longer about the art, and the "artist" knows it. They go for the fame.
The artist chose to sign away their ownership rights in those cases. No boo-hoo for the artist.
Its unbelievable how those who take personal accountability seriously are ridiculed by others for being blind of their own victimization.
There is a huge difference between attaining self reliance and being a bully. I often find those who can't understand that are often the first ones to cry "I'm a victim" when they aren't.
While true cases a being victimized do exist, they are no where close to as ubiquitous as our whiny as culture would lead you to believe.
I don't believe it is a load.
There is very rarely a situation where I would get run over where more diligence on my part wouldn't have swayed the outcome of an accident.
If a genocidal political regime puts me into a detention camp I chose to let them do it to me instead of killing me while I resist.
If I get mugged, it's because I didn't properly prepare myself for violent crime - or wasn't willing to take the necessary precautions to prevent it.
It is a matter of personal perspective.
I've never been a victim. Quite often I think people who claim to be victims do so when choices they made in their life didn't live up to expectations or a small percentage chance event occurred in place of normal events.
but he is still the victim here.
To quote some punk rock insight:
"You're only a victim when you admit to be."
Since the student who created the MySpace profile tried to make it look like this was a profile created by the principal, I'd say what he did also borders on identity theft.
You're kidding right? Identity theft requires you hijack an ID to accomplish some goal under the auspice of that ID. Please tell me one thing these students accomplished while posing as their principal?
All these kids have to say is that their stuff was parody. Happens all the time in other forms of media. Hell, people make good livings impersonating other famous people and doing things out of character. Is that identy theft?
Parody doesn't have to me nice. It can be malicious as hell.
I never said they couldn't pay them. I just stated that these were legal standards.
True, the hourly guy could be making more money - but that's not all there is to compensation.
The ability to influence actual change is worth more than money to some. I know that I am more than willing to "lose" a few dollars an hour in order to be given free reign to implement my ideas on a large scale. If my ideas work I am in a much better position to be given more critical tasks and matching compensation.
Some companies don't give this freedom to hourlies.
Did every one of those jobs have a labor union?
I know that the paid breaks as a postal worker did not come from the US Government being nice. They were a result of Postal Worker Unions negotiating benefits.
Labor Unions have forced a lot of companies into giving their hourly employees benefits not mandated by law.
What's strange is that there was a loss of prestige of sorts.
That's a really interesting point. I think the loss of prestige is a major factor of grumbling. Although I cannot determine if being classified as hourly is the source of the issue or if the rank and file hourly archetype is to blame.
At every company I have ever worked for, the hourlies rarely took any initiative to change anything. There were always plenty of complaints from this group, but rarely were there any potential solutions offered.
Was this a side effect of being an hourly worker? Did they feel they had no leverage or voice to influence change? Did they feel that their job classification put their jobs on a precipice and rocking the boat might get them fired?
Does being classified as an hourly worker limit your growth potential in a company? That varies by company to company, but I can understand how the perception might be that it would. I can see discontentment arising out of having a ceiling thrown on your career ladder, even if that ceiling is just a perception.
Sorry, not Federal Law - its state Law, so mileage may vary. Although, the laws amongst the states are very similar.
That's the law. If you are classified as an hourly worker you MUST take at least a 30 minute lunch break and have a 15 minute break for every 4 hours you work. Overtime is also regulated in a similar way.
What a fantastic non story.
Mayan Culture lives on the side of my van.