The problem is that you are now so jaded (possibly rightfully so?) that you assume most/. posters are morons who would say something so blatantly wrong, instead of clever techies making a great deadpan joke.
As jaded as I am, for some reason I still assumed he was joking. Who knows, maybe it was the fact that he didn't misspell basic words and actually used punctuation at the end of the sentence. Or maybe it's because I could see myself making the same joke;)
Ok since I realized I spent 15 minutes trying to provide practical info to an anonymous submitter who will never read it, let's see if I can game the system by getting mine higher in the list - replying to a random post at the top to link to a sadly lost post at the bottom;) Why bother? No idea, I guess I just felt like as a tech geek who has talked to his vet father about the SAME issues, I could provide something other than snark and cynicism to the / community for once...
I feel like I wasted my time with an elaborate post below explaining my own father's veterinary practice that will never be read, when I should have picked a better title like yours;)
My father is also a veterinarian with a private practice... I don't know enough about the exact details of his software but can give you the high level, as well as issues he has had, etc.
First, he has gone through a few (2 or 3 not sure) completely different systems (hardware and software) in the last ~20 years of having a "computerized" practice.
When they got the first system the practice was much smaller - 3 vets in the partnership and a handful of employees. Over time it has grown to employ another 3 full time vets and a much larger staff. So that's question 1: it may be small now, but do you expect it to grow? 2 networked workstations won't be enough if he may have 20+ employees in the future, and deciding on something today (hardware and software) that at least supports upgrades will go a long way to prevent having to redo the whole thing later.
Question 2 is related to the nature of his practice. Is it a relatively low-tech, rural practice or is he planning on modernizing/keeping up with technology? Back in the 70's the most high-tech equipment in most practices was the x-ray machine. Since then, my dad's practice has added an ultrasound, laparoscope, and most recently a digital x-ray that allows inexpensive, near instant access to results (without having to develop, etc) as well as convenient storage, display on a number of terminals in exam rooms, even convenient consults from remote specialists. That's in addition to all of the other benefits that come with professional veterinary software packages, like integration with outside labs to get faster test results, tracking of inventory and reordering, etc.
Question 3: how much does he care about his data/computer systems? If down is it a minor inconvenience or a crippling liability? If the latter, do you really want to build something for him with off the shelf parts with no support? Are you available for 24/7 support if something goes wrong? My dad's practice has 24/7 1 hour business support (from IBM? or something similar). If a system goes down, HDD dies, network is flaky, etc they will have someone there in less than an hour to replace hardware, diagnose issues, restore backups, etc. Sure, that service costs money but has been necessary several times over the past couple decades and saved their ass when it happened. On the other hand, if your father is basically using the machines for payroll, inventory, and bookkeeping, he might be ok with a simple backup system and your help when something goes wrong...
Anyway, I know my dad's practice now has a central server (I think just standard workstation HW with RAID and nightly backups?), a few terminals (I believe all Windows-based, since that's what the veterinary SW runs on), and most recently a medical grade monitor and high-res video card for x-ray display, along with a couple of WiFi laptops they use in exam rooms to show x-rays, look up histories, data entry, etc. All of it comes with 24/7 HW and SW support, which for their type of usage (and the fact they don't want or need a full time IT employee) I'd consider a must have...
Anyway, hope that helped. But to summarize I'd rank the goals as (not counting cost, which of course needs to be factored in depending on personal situation):
1) minimize downtime/lost revenue 2) allow modernization/support for new technologies as necessary 3) scalable if/when the practice grows in the future
What I would most definitely NOT worry about is the latest fancy hardware. If he's still surviving on a 486 with 8MB RAM, any reasonable modern HW will be cheap and more than enough. By all means go for reliability over performance, especially if you are doing it yourself. If buying HW/SW/support from a professional company, they will make sure the HW is adequate and reliable (since it costs THEM much more in the long run if it isn't).
Wasn't knocking your post... (assuming you were the anon OP, and not the anon submitter, in which case I would be knocking you) - just ranting about the crappy quality of the article (and title) itself:)
Well, it it completely unsubstatiated FUD propagated by an ANONYMOUS READER(!?) and misrepresented by an idiotic title. Maybe the silent majority of/. users - who I assume are WAY smarter than the vocal minority (doh - is that me?) who actually post, let alone the actual/. editors who decide it's post-worthy - voted the story down with the new feature on the alternative front page. Or is that too much to expect?
However, neither of those reactions produce more CO2. To produce CO2 you'd have to split the carbon bonds, which is combustion. Combustion is not particularly biochemically useful to a cell (duh) - and surprise - it requires oxygen
Nope. For example, in the Krebs cycle, many steps produce CO2, don't require O2, and yield reducing equivalents (a kind of power source). The oxygen is for oxidative fosforilation, which uses those reducing equivalents to make ATP (a better power source). However, in anaerobic conditions, those reducing equivalents pile up so they are spent in making alcohol or other compounds so the reaction can keep going.
Ok, I will try not to be mean, you obviously are interested in the science so I respect that.
I assume by "fosforilation" you mean phosphorylation? And by mentioning ATP I assume you mean "oxidative phosphorylation". Which obviously means oxidation, which by nature requires oxygen!
Anyway, this doesn't even make sense to argue against my post - I never said yeast can't undergo aerobic respiration - yes, the Krebs cycle is *AEROBIC* respiration - which yeast, like any eukaryotic cell, will prefer if GIVEN OXYGEN (actually S. cerevisiae doesn't necessarily. but we'll ignore that). The whole point of the thread is alcohol fermentation, an anaerobic process - ie NO OXYGEN. No oxygen, no Krebs cycle, lots of alcohol, and much rejoicing:)
Let's put it simply - you seem like a reasonably intelligent person, this is hard to argue...
YOU CAN'T GENERATE OXYGEN OUT OF THIN AIR! Please back your arguments with a proper balanced chemical equation, or don't bother...
Basically, you're right yet none of your arguments are
Ok, but I think I am right, AND my arguments are...
thanks for your reply, it's yet another bullshit post that pretends to sound authoritative!
I'm taking my information from books, not some random website
Would you be nice enough to win the discussion before doing that?
And I am taking my information from books, graduate level biology - and yes, in fact, the often useful random website. And I don't think discussions have to be "won" when just stating scientific facts.
Yes, I know that alcohol can be metabolized, and yes, when there is no more sugar for fermentation yeast may convert the alcohol to acetaldehyde, which then gets converted to acetic acid (aka vinegar).
However, neither of those reactions produce more CO2. To produce CO2 you'd have to split the carbon bonds, which is combustion. Combustion is not particularly biochemically useful to a cell (duh) - and surprise - it requires oxygen. And of course that goes back to the entire concept of fermentation, which is the ANAEROBIC metabolism of glucose (ie there is no oxygen present anyway).
And that takes ME back to my other statement in the OP - thanks for your reply, it's yet another bullshit post that pretends to sound authoritative!
Damn, you beat me to it! Don't you love how any bullshit sounding remotely authoritative just gets modded up...
I will just add one simple statement as supporting evidence to your correction:
C6H12O6 => 2(CH3CH2OH) + 2(CO2)
Also, fermenting in (solid) dough tends to trap the gases in pockets, followed by cooking which evaporates the alcohol. Fermenting in (liquid) wort/must releases the gases (unless bottled, etc) and keeps the alcohol in solution.
Never said it was. I assume you were too busy thinking outside the box in college to learn basic reading comprehension.
Now was that really necessary? Why do people always resort to attempting to insult grammar rules when they are frustrated?
Oh well, apologies for coming on so strong, I was just annoyed that it seemed like every reply to my posts lately seemed to have argued against something I never even wrote (like claiming I was arguing high GPAs means better workers, when what I pointed out is focusing on lower GPAs will NOT get you better workers; or that I insulted your grammar when I was in fact insulting your reading comprehension - your grammar was just fine!)
Besides, you insulted me first with the "dime a dozen hiring manager" crack. Calling me a hiring manager?? I WORK for a living!:-P
Anyone can get a 4.0 in school the past 13 years or so, you just have to keep your head down and crank out the code the profs expect.
Bullshit. If anyone can do it, then why don't they? I know plenty of people who double majored, played varsity sports, volunteered, played in the band, did research, founded billion dollar companies, or whatever who still managed to get a decent GPA. Having a life doesn't preclude excelling at the activity you are supposed to be focusing on in college. Maybe you went to a diploma mill, but not everyone else out there did.
Having worked at a variety of IT companies over the last decade
You know, that fact that you call them "IT companies" suggests to me you have never worked at a truly innovative software company in the first place. I have never heard of a single employee, coworker, manager, recruiter, interviewer, etc at any company I know of in the Valley call their employer "an IT company".
Besides, the point of my post was that hiring by *preferring* grads with a mediocre GPA will likely result in a mediocre workforce. I'd imagine hiring grads solely on a high GPA would also result in a non-ideal (in other ways) workforce. Yes, GPA is not at ALL the best indicator of future success. Never said it was. I assume you were too busy thinking outside the box in college to learn basic reading comprehension.
Either you are an imbecile or you are purposefully using a ridiculous excuse to hide your true reasons for opposing sexual activity of teenagers. Are you a catholic or a muslim? Then again, most of those have at least some integrity.
Option 3: you are an imbecile who calls people imbeciles and baselessly insults entire religions without actually reading the posts you reply to.
I have nothing against responsible sexually active teens, and nothing in my post said I did. I have something against a person claiming that it's ok for a 12 and 14 year old to have a child today because it happened to Medieval pregnant 14 year old brides.
And, for the record, parental authority has limits for two reasons: one, the rest of us must one day deal with the end result, and two, even children are still humans rather than just their parents property and as such have human rights.
I'm not sure what this has to do with my point that much of the basis of religious rules (don't eat pork, don't have sex until marriage, don't murder people) had a practical foundation in public health and welfare (notwithstanding any modern perversions of those rules to justify other beliefs). I don't even believe in any religious supernatural power anyway...
But anyway - just curious... do you believe it's legal and/or moral for a parent to kick their 12-14 year old out of the house because they disobeyed their rules? Should parents be legally obligated to financially support their grandchildren? Should parents be able to require abortions if the above answers are "no", and the alternative is raising a child they had no control over conceiving? I don't claim to pretend to have answers to those, but I can't really argue with a parent attempting to prevent those hypotheticals, as futile as it may be, whether they are a devout Catholic or an Athiest...
I just graduated in December and was hired in January by a very large engineering/design/build firm (in the Fortune 500.)... they prefer graduates with GPAs between 2.5 and 3.5, and that 3.9 or 4.0 students are often too difficult to work with in the office or field.
No offense, but most large companies like that thrive on mediocrity and the status quo, not innovation and ingenuity.
Large public companies need someone to make customers feel comfortable, maintain a giant existing code/technology base, and not rock the boat.
Startups and small companies (or the occasional large tech company trying to preseve its startup roots) need people who can think beyond what everyone else has already been doing and create something new. A bit of eccentricity is ok, and even encouraged, as long as they get results.
some students who keep a high GPA don't adjust as well to office life and field work as those who didn't spend all their time in the library.
Actually, my recollection is often the people who spent all of their time in the library tended to be the average students. A lot of the top students just didn't need to put in the same hours of studying to get by (or exceed).
Then again, I didn't just graduate in December - I have been working and hiring new grads in the industry for over 15 years...
Being married and pregnant at 14 was very common before (Western) society decided sex was a sin.
So was dying of childbirth at 16, or dying in general before 40.
Being married and pregnant at 14 was common when the father was 10-20 years older and wealthy, or a few years older and able to provide a living. Not when the father is 12 years old in ANY case, and not when the mother and father require 100% financial (and emotional) support from THEIR parents to survive.
This is not about prudish religions, it's about basic practicality. I don't understand why people can't get the basic parental concept of "my house, my rules". And "don't go having children when you are living here and can't support them yourself" is a perfectly reasonable rule.
Yay, I thought my Sunday afternoon was too free of idiocy, but Timothy has saved it with room to spare.
His pointless, misleading earlier posts today were just warmup to this one!
Yes, the average consumer will love to dig 2-3 levels deep into a phone with a totally non-tactile, non-intuitive UI (that they may have to unlock before using!) just to find the remote control app and turn down the volume on their TV.
The entire premise of this post is garbage... doesn't being an EDITOR imply some amount of DECISION MAKING about worthwhile posts? Or maybe Timothy is in fact an automatic forwarding program that analyzes and posts the most absurd or incorrect stories it receives. That would explain a lot. Either that or the/. management feels too guilty to fire a "mentally challenged" employee.
Yeah, there are also imaginary languages for imaginary processors like mic1 and stuff. But TFA is talking about operationg systems
Don't state what TFA says if you didn't even read TFA.
There isn't a SINGLE reference to Linux, Windows, or any other operating system in TFA. It was about lack of developer tools to create effective multithreaded applications, and had nothing to do with operating systems.
He had to master the Linux kernel as well as VB because these are the languages the servers run on.
Who the heck modded this "insightful"? It makes no sense whatsoever. Linux is not a language, Linux has nothing to do with MS Visual Basic, and servers don't "run on languages". It's just a collection of random buzzwords.
Anyway, it's great you are already interested in programming in high school, but spend more time understanding the technology and less on the buzzwords!
It is abuse to take advantage of some free service, thereby circumventing the telecom's charges
Google is not the *telecom*, AT&T is. So if you are going to claim it's abuse or theft of the *telecom's* service, it matters that the telecom itself provides the very mechanism to circumvent their SMS fees.
They can end it today, if they wish, or charge me for it, or limit my usage of it - it's all theirs.
Which is EXACTLY why it's NOT THEFT. They have the right to cancel, limit, or charge for whatever service as they please. But if they offer an open API for free and don't limit it, it's not theft to use it!
Anyway, I'm not even sure what your point is, your two posts are so contradictory. But my point is simple: don't call someone a thief when they are not.
The gateway used TCP/IP instead of SMS to send messages (they are still received via SMS, so the telecom is still making 1/2 of it's 1000% profit on SMS. I pay $20 for unlimited networking on my phone, so why should I pay another $0.10 for a short text message? In this case it was Google getting the shaft, since they were providing the free service. But hello, how much do you pay for your Google searches? Their entire company is base on providing "free" services, and supporting them through ads, etc. It's ridiculous to call using those free open services in a way Google can't monetize "stealing"!
Besides, you can send SMS messages to anyone on AT&T's network in the same way via YOURNUMBER@sms.att.net (I'm sure all other networks have a similar email gateway). Is that stealing $0.10 from your cellular provider?
Is it abuse of the phone company to use Skype over a DSL line instead of long distance to talk to someone? They are both using the same physical medium - it's just one is using an ancient, inefficient technology (POTS) and the other an efficient, general puprpose data transport mechanism (TCP/IP).
If they are losing money selling me service why is that my problem? If they are not making enough money then they should alter the pricing, not try to "throttle" my service. Or they should state that 3 DVDs at a time really means 3 DVDs when they feel like mailing it to me.
It's your problem because you are giving them money for a service, and YOU need to decide if the service is worth it.
Otherwise, I agree completely, that was my point. They pretend it's unlimited, but apparently if you use it more than what they consider "reasonable" (ie profitable) they throttle you. Their service is what it is, if you don't think it's worth it why are you giving them your money??
This is because their entire business model is based on the idea that "the more you hate us (and the less you use us), the more money we make - until you cancel."
Like Netflix service, like movies, want to get 5+ per month? They lose money on you, and it's in their best interest to throttle you. Like their streaming service, and watch a bunch of movies on it? At some point, it's also in their interest to hamper your experience so you stop using it so much (they lose money on every movie you stream).
It's not too far off from Comcast throttling/termination - once you are a customer that costs them more than they make, why do they want to keep you?
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't you see Superman? All that would do is make "Otisville" prime beach front real estate...
Yes, (as also mentioned a few posts above) there was a direct quote from the COO of TWC in the link referenced by TFA:
"Overage charges will be capped at $75 per month. That means that for $150 per month customers could have virtually unlimited usage at Turbo speeds."
The problem is that you are now so jaded (possibly rightfully so?) that you assume most /. posters are morons who would say something so blatantly wrong, instead of clever techies making a great deadpan joke.
As jaded as I am, for some reason I still assumed he was joking. Who knows, maybe it was the fact that he didn't misspell basic words and actually used punctuation at the end of the sentence. Or maybe it's because I could see myself making the same joke ;)
Ok since I realized I spent 15 minutes trying to provide practical info to an anonymous submitter who will never read it, let's see if I can game the system by getting mine higher in the list - replying to a random post at the top to link to a sadly lost post at the bottom ;) Why bother? No idea, I guess I just felt like as a tech geek who has talked to his vet father about the SAME issues, I could provide something other than snark and cynicism to the / community for once...
http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1188605&cid=27468991
YES! Agree with your post wholeheartedly.
I feel like I wasted my time with an elaborate post below explaining my own father's veterinary practice that will never be read, when I should have picked a better title like yours ;)
Why is it surprising that the most crime in the city occurred in their headquarters? The only confusing thing is why they actually REPORTED it!?! ;)
My father is also a veterinarian with a private practice... I don't know enough about the exact details of his software but can give you the high level, as well as issues he has had, etc.
First, he has gone through a few (2 or 3 not sure) completely different systems (hardware and software) in the last ~20 years of having a "computerized" practice.
When they got the first system the practice was much smaller - 3 vets in the partnership and a handful of employees. Over time it has grown to employ another 3 full time vets and a much larger staff. So that's question 1: it may be small now, but do you expect it to grow? 2 networked workstations won't be enough if he may have 20+ employees in the future, and deciding on something today (hardware and software) that at least supports upgrades will go a long way to prevent having to redo the whole thing later.
Question 2 is related to the nature of his practice. Is it a relatively low-tech, rural practice or is he planning on modernizing/keeping up with technology? Back in the 70's the most high-tech equipment in most practices was the x-ray machine. Since then, my dad's practice has added an ultrasound, laparoscope, and most recently a digital x-ray that allows inexpensive, near instant access to results (without having to develop, etc) as well as convenient storage, display on a number of terminals in exam rooms, even convenient consults from remote specialists. That's in addition to all of the other benefits that come with professional veterinary software packages, like integration with outside labs to get faster test results, tracking of inventory and reordering, etc.
Question 3: how much does he care about his data/computer systems? If down is it a minor inconvenience or a crippling liability? If the latter, do you really want to build something for him with off the shelf parts with no support? Are you available for 24/7 support if something goes wrong? My dad's practice has 24/7 1 hour business support (from IBM? or something similar). If a system goes down, HDD dies, network is flaky, etc they will have someone there in less than an hour to replace hardware, diagnose issues, restore backups, etc. Sure, that service costs money but has been necessary several times over the past couple decades and saved their ass when it happened. On the other hand, if your father is basically using the machines for payroll, inventory, and bookkeeping, he might be ok with a simple backup system and your help when something goes wrong...
Anyway, I know my dad's practice now has a central server (I think just standard workstation HW with RAID and nightly backups?), a few terminals (I believe all Windows-based, since that's what the veterinary SW runs on), and most recently a medical grade monitor and high-res video card for x-ray display, along with a couple of WiFi laptops they use in exam rooms to show x-rays, look up histories, data entry, etc. All of it comes with 24/7 HW and SW support, which for their type of usage (and the fact they don't want or need a full time IT employee) I'd consider a must have...
Anyway, hope that helped. But to summarize I'd rank the goals as (not counting cost, which of course needs to be factored in depending on personal situation):
1) minimize downtime/lost revenue
2) allow modernization/support for new technologies as necessary
3) scalable if/when the practice grows in the future
What I would most definitely NOT worry about is the latest fancy hardware. If he's still surviving on a 486 with 8MB RAM, any reasonable modern HW will be cheap and more than enough. By all means go for reliability over performance, especially if you are doing it yourself. If buying HW/SW/support from a professional company, they will make sure the HW is adequate and reliable (since it costs THEM much more in the long run if it isn't).
Wasn't knocking your post... (assuming you were the anon OP, and not the anon submitter, in which case I would be knocking you) - just ranting about the crappy quality of the article (and title) itself :)
Well, it it completely unsubstatiated FUD propagated by an ANONYMOUS READER(!?) and misrepresented by an idiotic title. Maybe the silent majority of /. users - who I assume are WAY smarter than the vocal minority (doh - is that me?) who actually post, let alone the actual /. editors who decide it's post-worthy - voted the story down with the new feature on the alternative front page. Or is that too much to expect?
However, neither of those reactions produce more CO2. To produce CO2 you'd have to split the carbon bonds, which is combustion. Combustion is not particularly biochemically useful to a cell (duh) - and surprise - it requires oxygen
Nope. For example, in the Krebs cycle, many steps produce CO2, don't require O2, and yield reducing equivalents (a kind of power source). The oxygen is for oxidative fosforilation, which uses those reducing equivalents to make ATP (a better power source). However, in anaerobic conditions, those reducing equivalents pile up so they are spent in making alcohol or other compounds so the reaction can keep going.
Ok, I will try not to be mean, you obviously are interested in the science so I respect that.
I assume by "fosforilation" you mean phosphorylation? And by mentioning ATP I assume you mean "oxidative phosphorylation". Which obviously means oxidation, which by nature requires oxygen!
Anyway, this doesn't even make sense to argue against my post - I never said yeast can't undergo aerobic respiration - yes, the Krebs cycle is *AEROBIC* respiration - which yeast, like any eukaryotic cell, will prefer if GIVEN OXYGEN (actually S. cerevisiae doesn't necessarily. but we'll ignore that). The whole point of the thread is alcohol fermentation, an anaerobic process - ie NO OXYGEN. No oxygen, no Krebs cycle, lots of alcohol, and much rejoicing :)
Let's put it simply - you seem like a reasonably intelligent person, this is hard to argue...
YOU CAN'T GENERATE OXYGEN OUT OF THIN AIR! Please back your arguments with a proper balanced chemical equation, or don't bother...
Basically, you're right yet none of your arguments are
Ok, but I think I am right, AND my arguments are...
thanks for your reply, it's yet another bullshit post that pretends to sound authoritative!
And I am taking my information from books, graduate level biology - and yes, in fact, the often useful random website. And I don't think discussions have to be "won" when just stating scientific facts.
Yes, I know that alcohol can be metabolized, and yes, when there is no more sugar for fermentation yeast may convert the alcohol to acetaldehyde, which then gets converted to acetic acid (aka vinegar).
However, neither of those reactions produce more CO2. To produce CO2 you'd have to split the carbon bonds, which is combustion. Combustion is not particularly biochemically useful to a cell (duh) - and surprise - it requires oxygen. And of course that goes back to the entire concept of fermentation, which is the ANAEROBIC metabolism of glucose (ie there is no oxygen present anyway).
And that takes ME back to my other statement in the OP - thanks for your reply, it's yet another bullshit post that pretends to sound authoritative!
The alcohol in bread does not evaporate.
Are you seriously basing this statement on a sketchy one paragraph blurb from 1926? One that sounds oh so rigorous with gems like:
"collected... from bakeries and housewives' ovens" (??)
Anyway, even playing along, the last sentence is:
"The alcohol content of a loaf of bread varies with the kind of yeast used, the time it sets, and the temperature of baking."
Why would it depend on the temperature of baking? Because that determines how much alcohol will EVAPORATE.
Damn, you beat me to it! Don't you love how any bullshit sounding remotely authoritative just gets modded up...
I will just add one simple statement as supporting evidence to your correction:
C6H12O6 => 2(CH3CH2OH) + 2(CO2)
Also, fermenting in (solid) dough tends to trap the gases in pockets, followed by cooking which evaporates the alcohol. Fermenting in (liquid) wort/must releases the gases (unless bottled, etc) and keeps the alcohol in solution.
Never said it was. I assume you were too busy thinking outside the box in college to learn basic reading comprehension.
Now was that really necessary? Why do people always resort to attempting to insult grammar rules when they are frustrated?
Oh well, apologies for coming on so strong, I was just annoyed that it seemed like every reply to my posts lately seemed to have argued against something I never even wrote (like claiming I was arguing high GPAs means better workers, when what I pointed out is focusing on lower GPAs will NOT get you better workers; or that I insulted your grammar when I was in fact insulting your reading comprehension - your grammar was just fine!)
Besides, you insulted me first with the "dime a dozen hiring manager" crack. Calling me a hiring manager?? I WORK for a living! :-P
Anyone can get a 4.0 in school the past 13 years or so, you just have to keep your head down and crank out the code the profs expect.
Bullshit. If anyone can do it, then why don't they? I know plenty of people who double majored, played varsity sports, volunteered, played in the band, did research, founded billion dollar companies, or whatever who still managed to get a decent GPA. Having a life doesn't preclude excelling at the activity you are supposed to be focusing on in college. Maybe you went to a diploma mill, but not everyone else out there did.
Having worked at a variety of IT companies over the last decade
You know, that fact that you call them "IT companies" suggests to me you have never worked at a truly innovative software company in the first place. I have never heard of a single employee, coworker, manager, recruiter, interviewer, etc at any company I know of in the Valley call their employer "an IT company".
Besides, the point of my post was that hiring by *preferring* grads with a mediocre GPA will likely result in a mediocre workforce. I'd imagine hiring grads solely on a high GPA would also result in a non-ideal (in other ways) workforce. Yes, GPA is not at ALL the best indicator of future success. Never said it was. I assume you were too busy thinking outside the box in college to learn basic reading comprehension.
Either you are an imbecile or you are purposefully using a ridiculous excuse to hide your true reasons for opposing sexual activity of teenagers. Are you a catholic or a muslim? Then again, most of those have at least some integrity.
Option 3: you are an imbecile who calls people imbeciles and baselessly insults entire religions without actually reading the posts you reply to.
I have nothing against responsible sexually active teens, and nothing in my post said I did. I have something against a person claiming that it's ok for a 12 and 14 year old to have a child today because it happened to Medieval pregnant 14 year old brides.
And, for the record, parental authority has limits for two reasons: one, the rest of us must one day deal with the end result, and two, even children are still humans rather than just their parents property and as such have human rights.
I'm not sure what this has to do with my point that much of the basis of religious rules (don't eat pork, don't have sex until marriage, don't murder people) had a practical foundation in public health and welfare (notwithstanding any modern perversions of those rules to justify other beliefs). I don't even believe in any religious supernatural power anyway...
But anyway - just curious... do you believe it's legal and/or moral for a parent to kick their 12-14 year old out of the house because they disobeyed their rules? Should parents be legally obligated to financially support their grandchildren? Should parents be able to require abortions if the above answers are "no", and the alternative is raising a child they had no control over conceiving? I don't claim to pretend to have answers to those, but I can't really argue with a parent attempting to prevent those hypotheticals, as futile as it may be, whether they are a devout Catholic or an Athiest...
I just graduated in December and was hired in January by a very large engineering/design/build firm (in the Fortune 500.) ... they prefer graduates with GPAs between 2.5 and 3.5, and that 3.9 or 4.0 students are often too difficult to work with in the office or field.
No offense, but most large companies like that thrive on mediocrity and the status quo, not innovation and ingenuity.
Large public companies need someone to make customers feel comfortable, maintain a giant existing code/technology base, and not rock the boat.
Startups and small companies (or the occasional large tech company trying to preseve its startup roots) need people who can think beyond what everyone else has already been doing and create something new. A bit of eccentricity is ok, and even encouraged, as long as they get results.
some students who keep a high GPA don't adjust as well to office life and field work as those who didn't spend all their time in the library.
Actually, my recollection is often the people who spent all of their time in the library tended to be the average students. A lot of the top students just didn't need to put in the same hours of studying to get by (or exceed).
Then again, I didn't just graduate in December - I have been working and hiring new grads in the industry for over 15 years...
Being married and pregnant at 14 was very common before (Western) society decided sex was a sin.
So was dying of childbirth at 16, or dying in general before 40.
Being married and pregnant at 14 was common when the father was 10-20 years older and wealthy, or a few years older and able to provide a living. Not when the father is 12 years old in ANY case, and not when the mother and father require 100% financial (and emotional) support from THEIR parents to survive.
This is not about prudish religions, it's about basic practicality. I don't understand why people can't get the basic parental concept of "my house, my rules". And "don't go having children when you are living here and can't support them yourself" is a perfectly reasonable rule.
Yay, I thought my Sunday afternoon was too free of idiocy, but Timothy has saved it with room to spare.
His pointless, misleading earlier posts today were just warmup to this one!
Yes, the average consumer will love to dig 2-3 levels deep into a phone with a totally non-tactile, non-intuitive UI (that they may have to unlock before using!) just to find the remote control app and turn down the volume on their TV.
The entire premise of this post is garbage... doesn't being an EDITOR imply some amount of DECISION MAKING about worthwhile posts? Or maybe Timothy is in fact an automatic forwarding program that analyzes and posts the most absurd or incorrect stories it receives. That would explain a lot. Either that or the /. management feels too guilty to fire a "mentally challenged" employee.
Yeah, there are also imaginary languages for imaginary processors like mic1 and stuff. But TFA is talking about operationg systems
Don't state what TFA says if you didn't even read TFA.
There isn't a SINGLE reference to Linux, Windows, or any other operating system in TFA. It was about lack of developer tools to create effective multithreaded applications, and had nothing to do with operating systems.
He had to master the Linux kernel as well as VB because these are the languages the servers run on.
Who the heck modded this "insightful"? It makes no sense whatsoever. Linux is not a language, Linux has nothing to do with MS Visual Basic, and servers don't "run on languages". It's just a collection of random buzzwords.
Anyway, it's great you are already interested in programming in high school, but spend more time understanding the technology and less on the buzzwords!
Huh? Did you even read your own post?
It is abuse to take advantage of some free service, thereby circumventing the telecom's charges
Google is not the *telecom*, AT&T is. So if you are going to claim it's abuse or theft of the *telecom's* service, it matters that the telecom itself provides the very mechanism to circumvent their SMS fees.
They can end it today, if they wish, or charge me for it, or limit my usage of it - it's all theirs.
Which is EXACTLY why it's NOT THEFT. They have the right to cancel, limit, or charge for whatever service as they please. But if they offer an open API for free and don't limit it, it's not theft to use it!
Anyway, I'm not even sure what your point is, your two posts are so contradictory. But my point is simple: don't call someone a thief when they are not.
That's a stupid argument.
The gateway used TCP/IP instead of SMS to send messages (they are still received via SMS, so the telecom is still making 1/2 of it's 1000% profit on SMS. I pay $20 for unlimited networking on my phone, so why should I pay another $0.10 for a short text message? In this case it was Google getting the shaft, since they were providing the free service. But hello, how much do you pay for your Google searches? Their entire company is base on providing "free" services, and supporting them through ads, etc. It's ridiculous to call using those free open services in a way Google can't monetize "stealing"!
Besides, you can send SMS messages to anyone on AT&T's network in the same way via YOURNUMBER@sms.att.net (I'm sure all other networks have a similar email gateway). Is that stealing $0.10 from your cellular provider?
Is it abuse of the phone company to use Skype over a DSL line instead of long distance to talk to someone? They are both using the same physical medium - it's just one is using an ancient, inefficient technology (POTS) and the other an efficient, general puprpose data transport mechanism (TCP/IP).
If they are losing money selling me service why is that my problem? If they are not making enough money then they should alter the pricing, not try to "throttle" my service. Or they should state that 3 DVDs at a time really means 3 DVDs when they feel like mailing it to me.
It's your problem because you are giving them money for a service, and YOU need to decide if the service is worth it.
Otherwise, I agree completely, that was my point. They pretend it's unlimited, but apparently if you use it more than what they consider "reasonable" (ie profitable) they throttle you. Their service is what it is, if you don't think it's worth it why are you giving them your money??
This is because their entire business model is based on the idea that "the more you hate us (and the less you use us), the more money we make - until you cancel."
Like Netflix service, like movies, want to get 5+ per month? They lose money on you, and it's in their best interest to throttle you. Like their streaming service, and watch a bunch of movies on it? At some point, it's also in their interest to hamper your experience so you stop using it so much (they lose money on every movie you stream).
It's not too far off from Comcast throttling/termination - once you are a customer that costs them more than they make, why do they want to keep you?