Whoah, whoah, whoah.... Since when can we send messages using the rotary dials on our phones?!? I think that kind of thing has the potential to make it big!
But by allowing it to happen this way, a woman could now have a positive reason to get an abortion. "Oh, they will just use it to save someone's life, so in reality I am just doing someone else a big favor. See? I'm a humanitarian by killing a growing human fetus."
Now you may see abortion as a right/wrong thing to do for your own moral reasons. But the problems I personally have with abortion is two:
1. We allow partial-birth abortions. That means that while the baby is still alive, its head is partially through the vaginal opening, and it's brains are evacuated out (sucked out).
2. There is no solid point at which someone can say, "this egg and this sperm is NOW a human being." I personally think it happens at some point after that joining, but some time before it is physically born; but you may disagree.
Because of what you said, and how you articulated with such skill, I now think so highly of you. I think you must be so much more intelligent than the stupid general public who don't know anything, and you must really have an inside track on information and politics that is usually kept from the rest of us.
I don't mean to sound rude or insensitive, I really don't. But how do the blind read magazines in print, today?
Oh, they don't? (Unless there's some special machine that can do it?)
Well that is a problem that can be solved on THAT end with technologies in that area; it shouldn't fall on me. Regulations should not be forced upon me to do it, unless its something like a government web site or something that is paid for by the public and expected to be used by the disabled.
Especially if its a vision-oriented or sound-oriented web site.
If I want to design a web page that excludes people who are color-blind, then the country I live in is free enough (USA) that I should be able to make that choice, as rude and inconsiderate as it might be.
Those restrictions aren't forced on print media. Shouldn't be forced on the web either.
I am now 35, and I have no degree, no certifications, but I have been in the IT field since 1997. I personally have not seen anything that hints at age preference, except maybe the other way: looking for older geeks.
I would never recommend not going to college and getting a degree to a HS student, but that's the choice I made and it can work. I am currently one of the highest paid folks in my field (according to those salary-comparison web sites) by a fairly high margin.
In short, I suggest being a general technologist with some specific knowledge. When someone has a question about how to do something, either know how to do it or know where to go to get it done the fastest, least expensive way, and know how to check the work for errors.
Where I lack in formal education and certification I make up for with a WEALTH of experience, from several different industries. That's the key: You have to offer something that no one else will offer. I worked in hospitality, legal, medical, and computers. Are there that many IT people who are able to draw on their legal knowledge? No. Medical? Same thing. And I also keep a portfolio of projects that I have done so that I can show specific examples of my work.
Now that CS degree might help you get your foot in the door. But I guarantee you, if they let me in for an interview, they'll hire me over someone with just a degree or a cert.
I'm a DB admin, and I use things that aren't toys; but what I've heard here is kinda harsh.
Look, it's all about "right tool for the right job." Why do you need a nuclear-powered drill that can make a tunnel from here to China, when really all you needed was a shovel?
For most daily projects that have small amounts of data, they may be using something like Crystal Reports or Excel or SPSS that just does all the number-crunching client-side anyway. You don't always need Oracle or [favorite DB flavor] for that.
Not at all. In fact, if anything I *have* to be more creative -- because when I was young, I had enough time (measured in days compared to my hours of free time now) to create things. Now that I'm old and have a life and a job and responsibilities, and relatively short on free time to do those same things (such as composing music), I am forced to maximize that time, so I am far more advanced than I was.
I think this is partially due to a theory that a friend of mine has (that I'll adapt here): "Art is not created, it is discovered."
I've pondered that for a long time, and still haven't quite made up my mind about it. But, one conclusion it led me to is that the more you are exposed to, the more you can use as a creative base to work with. Obviously, I didn't have the experiences I have now when I was younger, therefore... I think possibly harder to be creative with less stuff in the "library."
Actually, I fully agree with you. I noticed up until my later teens, I could learn some things much more quickly than I can now. However, today, I've also learned how to learn things faster. Some things I can memorize quite quickly, would have taken me a whole week to do before. (And this is a talent I've only had for a couple of years, since my 30's).
I am not even going to dignify this the time it takes to read the article, it is patently wrong.
I am 34, and I have never felt more quick, creative, and industrious as I am today. (And I can still whoop ass against guys half my age in on-line shooters.)
The reason older people appear to take longer to make decisions and learn and create and recall memory is simply because our database is far more full and complex than the youngster's.
When a youngster is taught to cross a one-way street, they look only the way traffic will be coming from.
But an old-folk goes, "Ah, a one-way sign. Hmm, I've seen people run the wrong way before..." so they look both ways.
When someone asks a youngster a question, they quickly run through their database in their mind and pick the answer (probably their only answer).
But an old-person may have seen the question more than once in their lifetime, and has to pick through a larger network of data, and decide through possible multiple instances of the same data, and compound those memories into an answer.
For example, ask a young person if eggs are good or bad for you. They'll think of the first aspect of eggs that they've heard, and tell you whether they're good or bad for you.
But an old person has to think, "Hmmm... back in the 70's, doctors said they were good for you. Then they said they were bad. Then certain kinds. Oh, and they may be good for certain parts of the body, but maybe elevate cholesterol and high blood pressure. Does it interact with any medications?..."
You get my point. It's an apples and oranges comparison he's trying to do.
And what about filters? Young people have fewer filters on their brains than older people. When I was younger, I could bounce down a stairway and have no problems. Now I have this filter on my brain that says, "before you move any part of your body, look ahead to see if it will cause pain."
Another filter is, when the wife says something that just sets herself up for a punchline, about 3 or 4 things drop down in my head that I *could* say. But which ones will get you in trouble? So I take longer to respond... and look slow.
Here's another example of a filter you can even test: Play CS or any other on-line shooter game where you have two teams. Play once where team-killing is disabled (can't kill your own guys). Then, play one where you can accidently shoot your own team. Takes longer to decide to shoot, doesn't it!
Yes, it is the most ridiculous thing in the world. Because then a guy could just make a big book of mundane facts, and any time one popped up just yell "copyright infringement!"
Now maybe not for a list that isn't made of facts; but that would enjoy copyright infringement in another way anyhow: such as a list of made up alien names.
But we're talking about a list of facts. Stoopid.
So what, emailing his friend to tell him what time and which station his train will arrive is also copyright infringement?
And how did he come up with his list? Does that even matter to you? Suppose he sat and watched all the trains come and go from each station, and derived his list that way?
No -- facts, lists, databases, none of that (I don't think) should be copyrightable, at all.
Besides, I think he could get around the copyright infringement quite easily: Just make all the times off by a minute earlier. Now they aren't even the same facts.
I wouldn't classify myself as a bozo, and I did jury duty. In the trial I was part of, I tried very hard to make an objective decision based on the evidence only, and very often I was the one who could refocus the group to the evidence. Most of the others in my group were teachers, and didn't seem much like stupid bozos either.
Sure, I could have made some racist remark or something during my short interview, like "well he's a black guy on trial, so obviously he's guilty!" But I wanted to contribute and help give a fair and un-biased trial.
Oh, sure. Why have any grammar rules at all then? It's just going to change tomorrow.
It may change it one day, but right now the official stance is that it does not mean the same thing. To use it incorrectly just looks ignorant and juvenile to anyone who knows better.
Well I get belly button lint every single day. I shower/bathe every day, sometimes twice a day. I am not fat. But I figured this was no mystery: I figured it out and I didn't need a govt grant. I simply think that certain belly buttons with the right amount of hair scrape across the shirt during the day (usually while moving your torso or even just walking) and collect the lint like the screen on a dryer. My lint is always the same color as my shirt, and brand new shirts collect far more lint than older shirts.
No, it wasn't American citizens and it wasn't mostly corporations either. It was foreign contributions (which is illegal, but they were made in small amounts to fly under the radar). I would give you a link, but there are so many. Just do a google search for Obama, foreign, contributions, illegal.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoah, whoah, whoah.... Since when can we send messages using the rotary dials on our phones?!? I think that kind of thing has the potential to make it big!
But by allowing it to happen this way, a woman could now have a positive reason to get an abortion. "Oh, they will just use it to save someone's life, so in reality I am just doing someone else a big favor. See? I'm a humanitarian by killing a growing human fetus."
Now you may see abortion as a right/wrong thing to do for your own moral reasons. But the problems I personally have with abortion is two:
1. We allow partial-birth abortions. That means that while the baby is still alive, its head is partially through the vaginal opening, and it's brains are evacuated out (sucked out).
2. There is no solid point at which someone can say, "this egg and this sperm is NOW a human being." I personally think it happens at some point after that joining, but some time before it is physically born; but you may disagree.
Because of what you said, and how you articulated with such skill, I now think so highly of you. I think you must be so much more intelligent than the stupid general public who don't know anything, and you must really have an inside track on information and politics that is usually kept from the rest of us.
Not.
I don't mean to sound rude or insensitive, I really don't. But how do the blind read magazines in print, today?
Oh, they don't? (Unless there's some special machine that can do it?)
Well that is a problem that can be solved on THAT end with technologies in that area; it shouldn't fall on me. Regulations should not be forced upon me to do it, unless its something like a government web site or something that is paid for by the public and expected to be used by the disabled.
Especially if its a vision-oriented or sound-oriented web site.
If I want to design a web page that excludes people who are color-blind, then the country I live in is free enough (USA) that I should be able to make that choice, as rude and inconsiderate as it might be.
Those restrictions aren't forced on print media. Shouldn't be forced on the web either.
What is this AM? Does it have to do with radios?
WTF. Is there a camera in my cubicle? Stop describing me.
For $20 I'll tell you what ??? is.
Let me offer you my perspective on this question.
I am now 35, and I have no degree, no certifications, but I have been in the IT field since 1997. I personally have not seen anything that hints at age preference, except maybe the other way: looking for older geeks.
I would never recommend not going to college and getting a degree to a HS student, but that's the choice I made and it can work. I am currently one of the highest paid folks in my field (according to those salary-comparison web sites) by a fairly high margin.
In short, I suggest being a general technologist with some specific knowledge. When someone has a question about how to do something, either know how to do it or know where to go to get it done the fastest, least expensive way, and know how to check the work for errors.
Where I lack in formal education and certification I make up for with a WEALTH of experience, from several different industries. That's the key: You have to offer something that no one else will offer. I worked in hospitality, legal, medical, and computers. Are there that many IT people who are able to draw on their legal knowledge? No. Medical? Same thing. And I also keep a portfolio of projects that I have done so that I can show specific examples of my work.
Now that CS degree might help you get your foot in the door. But I guarantee you, if they let me in for an interview, they'll hire me over someone with just a degree or a cert.
Just my $.47 (adjusted for inflation).
I think Kari's rack is "busted"... (har har)
No no!!
I just don't want their shitty little projects on my supermachine!
So I give them MS-Access or the crappy MSSQL version that runs on their own box or something... and I keep it off my big machine!
I'm a DB admin, and I use things that aren't toys; but what I've heard here is kinda harsh.
Look, it's all about "right tool for the right job." Why do you need a nuclear-powered drill that can make a tunnel from here to China, when really all you needed was a shovel?
For most daily projects that have small amounts of data, they may be using something like Crystal Reports or Excel or SPSS that just does all the number-crunching client-side anyway. You don't always need Oracle or [favorite DB flavor] for that.
Not at all. In fact, if anything I *have* to be more creative -- because when I was young, I had enough time (measured in days compared to my hours of free time now) to create things. Now that I'm old and have a life and a job and responsibilities, and relatively short on free time to do those same things (such as composing music), I am forced to maximize that time, so I am far more advanced than I was.
I think this is partially due to a theory that a friend of mine has (that I'll adapt here): "Art is not created, it is discovered."
I've pondered that for a long time, and still haven't quite made up my mind about it. But, one conclusion it led me to is that the more you are exposed to, the more you can use as a creative base to work with. Obviously, I didn't have the experiences I have now when I was younger, therefore... I think possibly harder to be creative with less stuff in the "library."
Actually, I fully agree with you. I noticed up until my later teens, I could learn some things much more quickly than I can now. However, today, I've also learned how to learn things faster. Some things I can memorize quite quickly, would have taken me a whole week to do before. (And this is a talent I've only had for a couple of years, since my 30's).
Meh!!!
What the heck does that even mean?
All I'm saying is that there are far more variables that determine how well your mind is working than the simplistic few he's looking at.
I am not even going to dignify this the time it takes to read the article, it is patently wrong.
I am 34, and I have never felt more quick, creative, and industrious as I am today. (And I can still whoop ass against guys half my age in on-line shooters.)
The reason older people appear to take longer to make decisions and learn and create and recall memory is simply because our database is far more full and complex than the youngster's.
When a youngster is taught to cross a one-way street, they look only the way traffic will be coming from.
But an old-folk goes, "Ah, a one-way sign. Hmm, I've seen people run the wrong way before..." so they look both ways.
When someone asks a youngster a question, they quickly run through their database in their mind and pick the answer (probably their only answer).
But an old-person may have seen the question more than once in their lifetime, and has to pick through a larger network of data, and decide through possible multiple instances of the same data, and compound those memories into an answer.
For example, ask a young person if eggs are good or bad for you. They'll think of the first aspect of eggs that they've heard, and tell you whether they're good or bad for you.
But an old person has to think, "Hmmm... back in the 70's, doctors said they were good for you. Then they said they were bad. Then certain kinds. Oh, and they may be good for certain parts of the body, but maybe elevate cholesterol and high blood pressure. Does it interact with any medications?..."
You get my point. It's an apples and oranges comparison he's trying to do.
And what about filters? Young people have fewer filters on their brains than older people. When I was younger, I could bounce down a stairway and have no problems. Now I have this filter on my brain that says, "before you move any part of your body, look ahead to see if it will cause pain."
Another filter is, when the wife says something that just sets herself up for a punchline, about 3 or 4 things drop down in my head that I *could* say. But which ones will get you in trouble? So I take longer to respond... and look slow.
Here's another example of a filter you can even test: Play CS or any other on-line shooter game where you have two teams. Play once where team-killing is disabled (can't kill your own guys). Then, play one where you can accidently shoot your own team. Takes longer to decide to shoot, doesn't it!
Yes, it is the most ridiculous thing in the world. Because then a guy could just make a big book of mundane facts, and any time one popped up just yell "copyright infringement!"
Now maybe not for a list that isn't made of facts; but that would enjoy copyright infringement in another way anyhow: such as a list of made up alien names.
But we're talking about a list of facts. Stoopid.
So what, emailing his friend to tell him what time and which station his train will arrive is also copyright infringement?
And how did he come up with his list? Does that even matter to you? Suppose he sat and watched all the trains come and go from each station, and derived his list that way?
No -- facts, lists, databases, none of that (I don't think) should be copyrightable, at all.
Besides, I think he could get around the copyright infringement quite easily: Just make all the times off by a minute earlier. Now they aren't even the same facts.
Not necessarily.
I wouldn't classify myself as a bozo, and I did jury duty. In the trial I was part of, I tried very hard to make an objective decision based on the evidence only, and very often I was the one who could refocus the group to the evidence. Most of the others in my group were teachers, and didn't seem much like stupid bozos either.
Sure, I could have made some racist remark or something during my short interview, like "well he's a black guy on trial, so obviously he's guilty!" But I wanted to contribute and help give a fair and un-biased trial.
(He was guilty as sin.)
You're using an example of a different phrase to show that this phrase means two different things.
You need to cite an example of this phrase correctly meaning something else.
Not in any style guide? Not in any serious collegiate dictionary?
Oh, sure. Why have any grammar rules at all then? It's just going to change tomorrow.
It may change it one day, but right now the official stance is that it does not mean the same thing. To use it incorrectly just looks ignorant and juvenile to anyone who knows better.
Well I get belly button lint every single day. I shower/bathe every day, sometimes twice a day. I am not fat. But I figured this was no mystery: I figured it out and I didn't need a govt grant. I simply think that certain belly buttons with the right amount of hair scrape across the shirt during the day (usually while moving your torso or even just walking) and collect the lint like the screen on a dryer. My lint is always the same color as my shirt, and brand new shirts collect far more lint than older shirts.
No, it doesn't "beg the question." It might raise the question, but it definitely doesn't beg the question.
http://begthequestion.info/
Get it right!
Then we had a crackhead kick in our door and steal shit so we moved ;)
Why on earth would you purposely have someone do that?
No, it wasn't American citizens and it wasn't mostly corporations either. It was foreign contributions (which is illegal, but they were made in small amounts to fly under the radar). I would give you a link, but there are so many. Just do a google search for Obama, foreign, contributions, illegal.
When I heard this story on the radio this morning, I instantly thought of that "andnothingofvaluewaslost" tag.
That would be 'aluminic,' not 'ironic.' There's no iron in the process.