One recent problem (at least in Europe, I suppose this may be more prevalent in the US) is the tendency of many companies to move, sensibly, datacentres out of town centres or business districts, but then forgetting that most administration can be done remotely (even Windows, ha, ha, ha) and trying to relocate their IT staff in the middle of nowhere as well.
Any IT person worth hiring would desperately try to find a new job in a civilized place, thus companies are left with people that are not necessarily the best.
Some of the most productive car plants in the world are there, the Unions in Germany (who actually have input in how the companies are run) would be classed as nothing but communist by most Usians from their brainwashed point of view of world politics.
Why should i care about what service provider they are using?
What is next people? Are you going to check also if they are using an iPhone or not? The kind of car they drive? The newspapers they read?
Unless the email address is obviously offensive, I see no reason whatsoever to even be thinking about it.
Those people saying that IT people should have their own domain, honestly, get a life. Have a domain and associated website if you want to, but it is outlandish to suggest it should be a de facto thing.
I personally invest enough hours at work doing technology stuff, I have no need or inclination to be running a website at home. It is called balance, something some people around here should be aiming more for.
Are there professional people out there (recruiters, HR, etc) dealing with important decisions based on such juvenile approach to hiring?
No wonder some companies are struggling to find high calibre people, basing their hiring choices on criteria that would not be uncommon amongst unruly teenagers.
... how such idiocy is moderated insightful as I write....
I am sure I am a the top of my game in what I do.
The only 2 email addresses I ever had are are considered by some as "unprofessional" (as in oh my good, he is not paying for a service that he can get for free! The horror!).
So, does that obtuse view of some about the world should count more than a measured approach to the capabilities of somebody?
I say no, but again, I am at the top of my game, worked in many places in different countries, and occasionally interviewed and managed a few people in some companies of certain fame, so perhaps my opinion is atypical.
It gives me a sense of injustice: it is simply not correct in a democracy that there are people that are entitled privileges and honours in accordance to who their ancestors are.
Also the Queen is not a diplomat. The UK has a well defined diplomatic corps and the Queen can't go around doing any diplomatic duties (which are negotiating with other nations about collaboration).
The Queen is a decorative figure, if you think that attending a party given by the Queen has any effect in international diplomatic relationships you are more uninformed and naive that you reasonably should.
Albert Einstein, one of my heroes, was smart in very specific fields of human endeavour, but in others it seems like he was as utterly incapable as anybody.
Civilized countries invade other countries based on blatant lies, kill thousands of people, imprison people without trial in places that they acquired by force from weaker countries.
Shall I continue?
Nope, unnecessary.
I have many other examples of countries that call themselves "civilized" who are partners of Mexico in the G20 or the OECD, but it would be as pointless as not considering Mexico a civilized place (as a matter of fact there is no country that is not civilized strictly speaking, since all human groups produce a civilization of some kind or another).
What do programmers do? Handle and facilitate the handling of information.
IT pure and simple.
But of course they want to declare programming a liberal art, and one day they will demand that all programming languages are based in French natural language.
Primitive people would have needed to figure out their environment first. That is something you can't do in a few decades, specially when you are not using s systematic approach to collecting knowledge (the scientific method is a recent invention and is not innate as far as we know).
Most likely people would move to one place or area, stay there for several hundreds of years, and groups would move slightly further away to adapt to new environments slowly.
Slashdot Mirror
One recent problem (at least in Europe, I suppose this may be more prevalent in the US) is the tendency of many companies to move, sensibly, datacentres out of town centres or business districts, but then forgetting that most administration can be done remotely (even Windows, ha, ha, ha) and trying to relocate their IT staff in the middle of nowhere as well.
Any IT person worth hiring would desperately try to find a new job in a civilized place, thus companies are left with people that are not necessarily the best.
Some of the most productive car plants in the world are there, the Unions in Germany (who actually have input in how the companies are run) would be classed as nothing but communist by most Usians from their brainwashed point of view of world politics.
Like if producing gas guzzlers that are inefficient and brake easily is the fault of the unions.
I thought that the geniuses commanding those huge bonuses, golden hand shakes and parachutes were the ones dictating corporate policy.
But hey, whatever rocks your boat matey.
No self respect, no self belief, no planning.
No sympathy from me frankly.
"get up a script that sends a copy of your Exchange logs to another box"
Woah! Are you saying you invented syslog for Windows.
I would patent it. Fast.
Why should i care about what service provider they are using?
What is next people? Are you going to check also if they are using an iPhone or not? The kind of car they drive? The newspapers they read?
Unless the email address is obviously offensive, I see no reason whatsoever to even be thinking about it.
Those people saying that IT people should have their own domain, honestly, get a life. Have a domain and associated website if you want to, but it is outlandish to suggest it should be a de facto thing.
I personally invest enough hours at work doing technology stuff, I have no need or inclination to be running a website at home. It is called balance, something some people around here should be aiming more for.
Personal domain a must?! For bunnies sakes ....
Sorry buddy, don't use plural.
I will judge people based on their merits and not on puerile assumptions.
I call that "us" professional people..
Are there professional people out there (recruiters, HR, etc) dealing with important decisions based on such juvenile approach to hiring?
No wonder some companies are struggling to find high calibre people, basing their hiring choices on criteria that would not be uncommon amongst unruly teenagers.
Really ....
... how such idiocy is moderated insightful as I write....
I am sure I am a the top of my game in what I do.
The only 2 email addresses I ever had are are considered by some as "unprofessional" (as in oh my good, he is not paying for a service that he can get for free! The horror!).
So, does that obtuse view of some about the world should count more than a measured approach to the capabilities of somebody?
I say no, but again, I am at the top of my game, worked in many places in different countries, and occasionally interviewed and managed a few people in some companies of certain fame, so perhaps my opinion is atypical.
It gives me a sense of injustice: it is simply not correct in a democracy that there are people that are entitled privileges and honours in accordance to who their ancestors are.
Also the Queen is not a diplomat. The UK has a well defined diplomatic corps and the Queen can't go around doing any diplomatic duties (which are negotiating with other nations about collaboration).
The Queen is a decorative figure, if you think that attending a party given by the Queen has any effect in international diplomatic relationships you are more uninformed and naive that you reasonably should.
Her only substantive speech is parroted, word by word, as mandated by the Prime Minister of the day.
The Queen has no democratic mandate of any kind, just by that simple fact she can't never claim to be the voice of the people.
The naivety of some British people is touching.
The point is to accept the rule of somebody only because her ancestry.
In a democracy that is a monumental contradiction, but most people in the UK are too uninterested in politics to care .
Being a British Citizen does not mean you pledge allegiance to the Queen.
This is specially true of people that take British citizenship, you have the option not to swear allegiance if you don't wish to do so.
But I have never met anybody that comes to Britain specifically to see the Queen palaces only.
JS Bach.
Cervantes.
Newton.
By that measure exactly.
What is intelligence?
Albert Einstein, one of my heroes, was smart in very specific fields of human endeavour, but in others it seems like he was as utterly incapable as anybody.
It is now demonstrated that all monkeys develop cultures and technology.
It is utterly immoral to do any testing on them.
Mexico is run by the descendants of both the people that killed the natives and the natives.
Your assertion that "The Mexican government is the heir of the Spanish Empire" is so monumentally ignorant that does not deserve any further comment.
Civilized countries invade other countries based on blatant lies, kill thousands of people, imprison people without trial in places that they acquired by force from weaker countries.
Shall I continue?
Nope, unnecessary.
I have many other examples of countries that call themselves "civilized" who are partners of Mexico in the G20 or the OECD, but it would be as pointless as not considering Mexico a civilized place (as a matter of fact there is no country that is not civilized strictly speaking, since all human groups produce a civilization of some kind or another).
Oh wait, the PP was an AC's. Never mind.
How do you know it is obvious?
It could have been buried deep in the innards of code decades old.
"Information Technology"
What do programmers do? Handle and facilitate the handling of information.
IT pure and simple.
But of course they want to declare programming a liberal art, and one day they will demand that all programming languages are based in French natural language.
Primitive people would have needed to figure out their environment first. That is something you can't do in a few decades, specially when you are not using s systematic approach to collecting knowledge (the scientific method is a recent invention and is not innate as far as we know).
Most likely people would move to one place or area, stay there for several hundreds of years, and groups would move slightly further away to adapt to new environments slowly.
And I use the word in this context fully conscious, but I think it is the appropriate one.
"MS has an amazing ability to fuck things up"
and previously you said
"That's not to say that MS won't show up with a mule and a paper cone taped to it's forehead with duct tape"
Should I call the RSPCA or PETA?
Apple is not even king in the smart phone market.
So again, they are king of what exactly?
Hype and marketing? Yes, absolutely.
Anything else?
Show me the numbers.