You know, I'm a "nerd". I was bullied and unpopular in high school (although I did get along with the stoners), and life got incredibly better when I graduated. Hell, I even use Linux, and playing around in code-land is one of my free-time activities.
Unlike the rest of your bigoted rant, however, I don't seem to have problems talking about subjects other than computers -- because I'm a nerd. The words "I don't know, and I don't care" rarely leave my mouth. Nerds aren't just people who use computers, mind you; they are people who are interested in anything and everything they can get their hands on. I can hold my own in conversations ranging from contemporary politics, to cooking, fashion, and interior design -- and, no, I'm not gay.
Problems with women? Not really. I seem to have a better success rate than the average, although I try rather less -- I rarely go to bars or clubs, and don't leave home with the attitude of "picking up chicks." I've got way too much work to do to worry about my girlfriend status (which is leaning towards the affermative at this juncture).
I oppose the DMCA, the PATRIOT act, and the oligarchies known as the MPAA and RIAA. Not because I want free stuff, but because I don't think it's fair that my $20 CD purchase results in less than a dollar for the person whose music I'm buying. I think it's asinine that I am somehow a thief for wanting to have my music in a variety of formats, each one suitable for a different venue. I didn't license my favorite Depeche Mode album; I purchased it, and I should be allowed to do whatever I damn well please with it.
Casual dress? Of course! Which do you think I'd rather have when crawling under a dusty floor in a datacenter: An expensive pair of slacks and a nice, white shirt, or a pair of jeans and a T-shirt that cost me $20 at Target? I don't like the idea of having to shell out $50 to $100 for an outfit that I plan to get dirty on a regular basis.
I also work as a sysadmin, and get angry with users, why? Because they can't seem to understand very simple concepts that are crucial to their jobs. I mean, really, how many times should I have to explain the difference between a direct dial-in (to our modem bank) and dialing in to an ISP (to their modem bank)? This is like explaining to a forklift driver why he needs to only enter through the "entrance" door in the warehouse.
As to the last part -- I'm not disliked (well, people like you don't like me, but I don't care), lonely, or bullied -- I'd like to see someone pull the latter, as I'm also a physical nerd -- I run, lift weights, and study martial arts.
First off, on the Office format -- let's say that I've created a horribly addictive drug, and after I knock off all the other dealers in my 'hood, I get all the local drug addicts addicted to my particular new drug. I don't tell anyone else how to make it, however, because I don't want to stand the chance of losing my standing as a drug dealer, or run the risk of some enterprising chemist making an antidote that helps people get un-hooked.
Get it?
As for the rest, I'm going to present an analogy: Let's say you own a business; how about a coffee shop? Good. Now, in this coffee shop, you buy your beans, like almost all other coffee shops, from single supplier, because:
(a) The supplier has cornered the 99% of the coffee market, with the exception of a few independent gourmet roasters (Apple Coffee Co., Sun Coffees Inc., BeOS Beans, etc.) that cater to specific tastes, as well as group of individuals who grow their own coffee and give the surplus away to anyone who is willing to come pick up a bag (GNU Coffee).
(b) They make a consistent blend that, while not extraordinary, is palatable to most people -- not too bitter, not too mellow, and they sell convenient take-home packages of pre-ground coffee.
So far, there's no problem -- they are a good supplier, and make a product that is adequate, although the manufacturing process causes the coffee to clog up your coffeemakers more often than any other brand.
Now, let's say that, since you're an enterprising coffee-shop owner, you want to offer your customers a variety; after all, some of your customers might prefer gourmet beans, and others might want independently-grown coffee -- the latter is even more attractive, because you can get it for free! Sure, the majority of your customers will probably stick with MS Coffee, but you'll gain a bit more business from high-end consumers (who prefer the gourmet blends). Furthermore, the more consumers that you can get to switch to purchasing the gourmet blends, the more money you make (because it's cheaper to buy coffee from them than MS Coffee Co.).
So, you've got this great idea -- give your customers the *choice* of coffee! Great! Except the day you are ready to place your order, you get a fax from your primary supplier telling you that if they see you selling any coffee that didn't come from them, that they'll instantly jack the price of your coffee into the stratosphere. Since you need their coffee to compete with other shops (because the gourmet stuff doesn't cater to the mass-market), this is unacceptable. Your only option is to capitulate.
You have just lost profits because your supplier is leveraging its monopoly in an unfair manner, in *opposition* to the forces of the open market.
Now, let's take this further -- the blend of the main producer gets more and more refined over time; it appeals to more and more consumers. But just as you're getting over being sore from the gourmet-coffee fiasco, you get another fax from MS Coffee -- this time telling you that all coffee has to be given to the customer with cream and sugar.
This is, of course, an outrage! Not all your customers want cream and sugar, although most of them are so used to coming to your shop that they probably won't leave. Some will, however, and they'll blame *you* for not supplying them with the black cup of joe that they wanted. Furthermore, although MS Coffee supplies the cream and sugar for every cup, they're charging you more for their coffee, eating into your profits.
First off, don't knock Ranma. Them's fightin' words here.;)
Second, it's not supposed to be "high literature" -- it's entertainment reading. Consider manga not to be on the same plane as, say, Myamoto Musashi or T.S. Eliot, but more along the same lines as Clive Cussler, Douglas Adams, or Neil Stephenson.
Sure, there are a lot more in the way of pictures, but there's also quite a bit of text, and Japanese tends to be quite a bit more compressed than English. The stories in manga can be just as intricate and intertwined as any novel; and just as plain and boring as any novel. It's all in the writer -- not the medium.
Third, I believe manga is one of the reasons that Japan has a much higher rate of literacy than the U.S.; it's cheap, plentiful, and with the wide variety, it's hard to not find something that will interest you. Personally, I'd rather see a hundred kids reading comic books, than a hundred kids sitting stoned in front of the T.V.
When I worked for DEC they had a rule, "A+ or your ass is gone."
Judging by the fact that DEC stock now trades under HP's ticker symbol (DEC -> Compaq -> HP), I would think long and hard before looking to their more asinine management policies as being a Good Thing.
The two primary reasons I've stuck with my trusty Nikon 35mm SLR (rather than switching to a Nikon high-scale digital) are easily addressed by this new sensor technology; namely, no chromatic/edge abberation and increased pixel density over a standard CMOS/CCD.
Now all I need to do is wait until Nikon comes out with a D-series with one of these babies in it...hopefully the guys over there will grow some additional clue and do what Kodak has done with the sensor size; namely, made it the same size as a frame of 35mm film -- meaning that all my glass will function the same on my new digitial as it does on my current SLR.
*sigh* I guess I've got something else expensive on my I-want list...
The first part of your post was quite correct; if you're going to spend your life chasing a proverbial carrot, then make sure you enjoy the chase, because you'll never get that carrot.
The second part of your post was pure flamebait, and boiled down to "If you find Gawd, you'll be happy; if you don't, you're screwed." I'm sorry, but I'm one of the many that have found the exact opposite to be true; finding the lack of any deity has put my life in order. For some, this doesn't work -- apparently you're one of that camp. For others, they need to find Allah, or seek the wisdom of Buddha. For some, like me, atheism is the only way to fly.
It just really gets on my tits when some evangelist just *has* to put their two cents in that "we can't find happiness and fullfillment outside of God."
In a nutshell, happiness is where you find it. It can't be given to you by a church, or sold to you in a store. It can only be found by you, and only when you're ready to find it.
Re:I'd only point out that. . .
on
Tai Chi Robots
·
· Score: 2
Three things. First:
Van Damme isn't a boxer, he's a very competent martial artist (kickboxing and jeet kun do) with fantastic technique (unlike, say, Steven Segal, but that's another story). He has much more in common with our aforementioned Grandmaster than he does with Mike "Lend me your Ear" Tyson.
Your second analogy about the superheavyweight vs. the bantamweight is also flawed; it's assuming that both have had the same training and are competing in the same style; a Tai Chi or Gung Fu master has had vastly different training than Mike Tyson; It's like putting a Nascar driver (in his Nascar vehicle) on a Formula-1 circuit; sure, in his element, he may be fantastic; but he'll be seeing exhaust fumes in F1.
Second:
I think your only experience with martial arts is what you've seen in the movies (most of which isn't real), and some of the *worthless* "self defense" and Tae-Kwon-Doe classes taught in suburbs and at junior colleges[1]. If you think that a Tai-Chi master is just some git who earned his black belt by attending thrice weekly for a few years, you've got another thing coming.
Third, and final:
I think you need to lighten up, maybe seek therapy.
[1] On a funny note, I once took one of those "self defense" classes for shits-and-giggles; hey, P.E. units are required, and it looked like fun. Sad thing is, the "master" couldn't joint-lock or throw me, and his student assistants (the "high level" students) were slow as hell -- too many Twinkies from what I could see; I accidentally injured one of the student assistants because I was expecting him to move his leg before I could kick his shin, and he didn't. I'm just glad I wasn't kicking full-force, or I would have shattered his leg!
This is off-topic, but I completely agree. I remember one time walking past the Tai Chi class at my local school (they were doing chi-gung on one of the grassy commons), and I overheard a couple of football-jock-wannabe types commenting on how they could easily kick the shit out of anyone who studied such a pansy-ass martial art.
I asked them to stand on the ball of one foot (not flat-footed, but on the ball of the foot) and extend their other foot out while keeping their hands at their sides. They couldn't even stand on one foot, and I think they realized that it takes a bit more talent and strength to perform Tai Chi.
Re:I'd only point out that. . .
on
Tai Chi Robots
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Having seen something similar in action, I'd bet on the exalted Grandmaster. Katas are practiced in slow motion to build technique and strength. Yes, strength. Try doing a head-high front kick at 1/20 the speed and see if you can keep your leg extended at head-height for more than a fraction of a second.
And if you believe that technique is unimportant compared to strength, might I invite you to visit the Skip Barber racing school and take the Econoline Van tour, where the instructor races one of the beginner students. The instructor gets an Econoline van, and the student is in a Corvette. I'll give you three guesses as to who wins, and the first two don't count.
It's the same thing in combat. Proper technique and speed will slaughter brute force any day of the week.
Regardless of whether people here do or don't , most of the people who are buying Gateway-type computers LIKE the Microsoft suite of products. Most of these people, politics aside and given a choice, would take Word any day over WordPerfect and would take Excel any day over 1-2-3. That's the reality of the marketplace that MS Office dominates - in fact, it's the very reflection of MS Office dominance.
Actually, no, they don't really give a rat's ass about using the Microsoft suite of products; they're just used to them. It's like having an old, comfortable, yet completely worn-out pair of shoes -- they were great at one time (Office97), and usable for quite a long time, and switching to a newer, cheaper, better pair of shoes is a painful process (breaking them in), but in the end you adapt to them, and you'll repeat the process every time you need new shoes.
Too much love can be stifling. Too much happinines can make you ungaurded and easy to hurt.
I feel sorry for you if you really believe that.
No, he's right; think "spoiled child". Their parents love them *so* much that any thought of *possibly* hurting them goes right out the window, and any idea of discipline goes right with it. If you don't believe me, walk around in a supermarket for awhile, and observe the parents that are *begging* their kids to behave. Do you really think that a deeply ingrained response to tell figures of authority to go stuff themselves is going to be beneficial later in life?
"Screw you boss, I'm not doing that because I don't wanna," isn't the best way to keep a job.
Easily hurt can be seen in children that have had their self-esteem falsely reinforced. By only giving positive feedback, you spare a child temporary emotional pain and possible and/or perceived humiliation in front of their peers. The problem with this is that they come to expect it, which leads to a disassociation from reality -- the child expects to live in a wonderful, happy bubble, and whenever that bubble is threatened by an external entity (failing a test, rejection by a love-interest, etc.), they will lash out, often violently.
In the first case, the one where you were told to sign the contract during the interview, you could have signed it, and made a case in court that your signature was obtained under duress -- namely, that the company-in-question used unfair leverage (your *desperate* need for a job) to get you to sign a highly unfair contract. Contracts signed under duress aren't binding.
In the second case, I would have fired up OpenOffice (which handles Word DOC files just fine), struck out the portions I didn't like, then signed it and turned it in. I'd say there's a ninety-percent chance that they won't read it, and that it'll just be thrown in your employee file; if the time ever comes to take you into court, well, they don't have a leg to stand on.
More than *anything* else, I recommend purchasing good cutlery. You can easily spend a few thousand dollars on a set of knives that will last you a lifetime, but if you can drop something in the $500 range, I recommend the J.A. Henckels Vier Sterne (Four Star) series -- the blades are very high quality, freeze-hardened steel, and as long as you take proper care of them, they should last eternally.
If they don't, that's what the lifetime warranty is for.
On top of those, get two cutting boards -- a larger wood one for dealing with dry goods and vegetables, and a plastic one for dealing with meats (so it can be washed in the dishwasher, and because the blood won't soak into the plastic).
I'm assuming that by "Java", you mean JSP; anyone who uses an actual *Java* application to implement a *webapp* needs to be shot. Repeatedly.
That being said, there are a few reasons, actually. I do some development work in Java, but I'm also pretty well-versed in a variety of other languages; including C, C++, Perl, Assembly (x86 and good 'ole 68k), and PHP (and shell scripting, of course). Compared to PHP, JSP is a *pig*. It eats up a much larger chunk of memory, more CPU time, and is IMHO a terrible platform for developing small web-based applications. JSP+EJB does have its uses, but not in the arena of small webapps.
This is where PHP really shines; it's very fast, has a small footprint, and is *much* easier to use and debug than JSP is.
So, for writing huge, enterprise-level apps, JSP+EJB is the way to go. For writing smaller apps; things that need to be written quickly and securely, I'll stick with PHP.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. Anything that gets people out of their little pollution-generating cages is, IMO, a good thing.
Talk about stereotyping to the extreme.
You know, I'm a "nerd". I was bullied and unpopular in high school (although I did get along with the stoners), and life got incredibly better when I graduated. Hell, I even use Linux, and playing around in code-land is one of my free-time activities.
Unlike the rest of your bigoted rant, however, I don't seem to have problems talking about subjects other than computers -- because I'm a nerd. The words "I don't know, and I don't care" rarely leave my mouth. Nerds aren't just people who use computers, mind you; they are people who are interested in anything and everything they can get their hands on. I can hold my own in conversations ranging from contemporary politics, to cooking, fashion, and interior design -- and, no, I'm not gay.
Problems with women? Not really. I seem to have a better success rate than the average, although I try rather less -- I rarely go to bars or clubs, and don't leave home with the attitude of "picking up chicks." I've got way too much work to do to worry about my girlfriend status (which is leaning towards the affermative at this juncture).
I oppose the DMCA, the PATRIOT act, and the oligarchies known as the MPAA and RIAA. Not because I want free stuff, but because I don't think it's fair that my $20 CD purchase results in less than a dollar for the person whose music I'm buying. I think it's asinine that I am somehow a thief for wanting to have my music in a variety of formats, each one suitable for a different venue. I didn't license my favorite Depeche Mode album; I purchased it, and I should be allowed to do whatever I damn well please with it.
Casual dress? Of course! Which do you think I'd rather have when crawling under a dusty floor in a datacenter: An expensive pair of slacks and a nice, white shirt, or a pair of jeans and a T-shirt that cost me $20 at Target? I don't like the idea of having to shell out $50 to $100 for an outfit that I plan to get dirty on a regular basis.
I also work as a sysadmin, and get angry with users, why? Because they can't seem to understand very simple concepts that are crucial to their jobs. I mean, really, how many times should I have to explain the difference between a direct dial-in (to our modem bank) and dialing in to an ISP (to their modem bank)? This is like explaining to a forklift driver why he needs to only enter through the "entrance" door in the warehouse.
As to the last part -- I'm not disliked (well, people like you don't like me, but I don't care), lonely, or bullied -- I'd like to see someone pull the latter, as I'm also a physical nerd -- I run, lift weights, and study martial arts.
I have no points, but I must mod up.
First off, on the Office format -- let's say that I've created a horribly addictive drug, and after I knock off all the other dealers in my 'hood, I get all the local drug addicts addicted to my particular new drug. I don't tell anyone else how to make it, however, because I don't want to stand the chance of losing my standing as a drug dealer, or run the risk of some enterprising chemist making an antidote that helps people get un-hooked.
Get it?
As for the rest, I'm going to present an analogy: Let's say you own a business; how about a coffee shop? Good. Now, in this coffee shop, you buy your beans, like almost all other coffee shops, from single supplier, because:
(a) The supplier has cornered the 99% of the coffee market, with the exception of a few independent gourmet roasters (Apple Coffee Co., Sun Coffees Inc., BeOS Beans, etc.) that cater to specific tastes, as well as group of individuals who grow their own coffee and give the surplus away to anyone who is willing to come pick up a bag (GNU Coffee).
(b) They make a consistent blend that, while not extraordinary, is palatable to most people -- not too bitter, not too mellow, and they sell convenient take-home packages of pre-ground coffee.
So far, there's no problem -- they are a good supplier, and make a product that is adequate, although the manufacturing process causes the coffee to clog up your coffeemakers more often than any other brand.
Now, let's say that, since you're an enterprising coffee-shop owner, you want to offer your customers a variety; after all, some of your customers might prefer gourmet beans, and others might want independently-grown coffee -- the latter is even more attractive, because you can get it for free! Sure, the majority of your customers will probably stick with MS Coffee, but you'll gain a bit more business from high-end consumers (who prefer the gourmet blends). Furthermore, the more consumers that you can get to switch to purchasing the gourmet blends, the more money you make (because it's cheaper to buy coffee from them than MS Coffee Co.).
So, you've got this great idea -- give your customers the *choice* of coffee! Great! Except the day you are ready to place your order, you get a fax from your primary supplier telling you that if they see you selling any coffee that didn't come from them, that they'll instantly jack the price of your coffee into the stratosphere. Since you need their coffee to compete with other shops (because the gourmet stuff doesn't cater to the mass-market), this is unacceptable. Your only option is to capitulate.
You have just lost profits because your supplier is leveraging its monopoly in an unfair manner, in *opposition* to the forces of the open market.
Now, let's take this further -- the blend of the main producer gets more and more refined over time; it appeals to more and more consumers. But just as you're getting over being sore from the gourmet-coffee fiasco, you get another fax from MS Coffee -- this time telling you that all coffee has to be given to the customer with cream and sugar.
This is, of course, an outrage! Not all your customers want cream and sugar, although most of them are so used to coming to your shop that they probably won't leave. Some will, however, and they'll blame *you* for not supplying them with the black cup of joe that they wanted. Furthermore, although MS Coffee supplies the cream and sugar for every cup, they're charging you more for their coffee, eating into your profits.
I've seen these guys posting in alt.cryptography -- they dump a big string of ciphertext in the newsgroup and say, "Betcha can't decrypt this!"
Too bad they don't provide the algorithm, of course. I don't think I need to go into detail on why this is a Bad Thing.
First off, don't knock Ranma. Them's fightin' words here. ;)
Second, it's not supposed to be "high literature" -- it's entertainment reading. Consider manga not to be on the same plane as, say, Myamoto Musashi or T.S. Eliot, but more along the same lines as Clive Cussler, Douglas Adams, or Neil Stephenson.
Sure, there are a lot more in the way of pictures, but there's also quite a bit of text, and Japanese tends to be quite a bit more compressed than English. The stories in manga can be just as intricate and intertwined as any novel; and just as plain and boring as any novel. It's all in the writer -- not the medium.
Third, I believe manga is one of the reasons that Japan has a much higher rate of literacy than the U.S.; it's cheap, plentiful, and with the wide variety, it's hard to not find something that will interest you. Personally, I'd rather see a hundred kids reading comic books, than a hundred kids sitting stoned in front of the T.V.
They've got several. Oh, you aren't talking about thickness?
I thought they were mirrored at /dev/zero...
That would help with the obesity problem many managers seem to have...
When I worked for DEC they had a rule, "A+ or your ass is gone."
Judging by the fact that DEC stock now trades under HP's ticker symbol (DEC -> Compaq -> HP), I would think long and hard before looking to their more asinine management policies as being a Good Thing.
The two primary reasons I've stuck with my trusty Nikon 35mm SLR (rather than switching to a Nikon high-scale digital) are easily addressed by this new sensor technology; namely, no chromatic/edge abberation and increased pixel density over a standard CMOS/CCD.
Now all I need to do is wait until Nikon comes out with a D-series with one of these babies in it...hopefully the guys over there will grow some additional clue and do what Kodak has done with the sensor size; namely, made it the same size as a frame of 35mm film -- meaning that all my glass will function the same on my new digitial as it does on my current SLR.
*sigh* I guess I've got something else expensive on my I-want list...
The first part of your post was quite correct; if you're going to spend your life chasing a proverbial carrot, then make sure you enjoy the chase, because you'll never get that carrot.
The second part of your post was pure flamebait, and boiled down to "If you find Gawd, you'll be happy; if you don't, you're screwed." I'm sorry, but I'm one of the many that have found the exact opposite to be true; finding the lack of any deity has put my life in order. For some, this doesn't work -- apparently you're one of that camp. For others, they need to find Allah, or seek the wisdom of Buddha. For some, like me, atheism is the only way to fly.
It just really gets on my tits when some evangelist just *has* to put their two cents in that "we can't find happiness and fullfillment outside of God."
In a nutshell, happiness is where you find it. It can't be given to you by a church, or sold to you in a store. It can only be found by you, and only when you're ready to find it.
Three things. First:
Van Damme isn't a boxer, he's a very competent martial artist (kickboxing and jeet kun do) with fantastic technique (unlike, say, Steven Segal, but that's another story). He has much more in common with our aforementioned Grandmaster than he does with Mike "Lend me your Ear" Tyson.
Your second analogy about the superheavyweight vs. the bantamweight is also flawed; it's assuming that both have had the same training and are competing in the same style; a Tai Chi or Gung Fu master has had vastly different training than Mike Tyson; It's like putting a Nascar driver (in his Nascar vehicle) on a Formula-1 circuit; sure, in his element, he may be fantastic; but he'll be seeing exhaust fumes in F1.
Second:
I think your only experience with martial arts is what you've seen in the movies (most of which isn't real), and some of the *worthless* "self defense" and Tae-Kwon-Doe classes taught in suburbs and at junior colleges[1]. If you think that a Tai-Chi master is just some git who earned his black belt by attending thrice weekly for a few years, you've got another thing coming.
Third, and final:
I think you need to lighten up, maybe seek therapy.
[1] On a funny note, I once took one of those "self defense" classes for shits-and-giggles; hey, P.E. units are required, and it looked like fun. Sad thing is, the "master" couldn't joint-lock or throw me, and his student assistants (the "high level" students) were slow as hell -- too many Twinkies from what I could see; I accidentally injured one of the student assistants because I was expecting him to move his leg before I could kick his shin, and he didn't. I'm just glad I wasn't kicking full-force, or I would have shattered his leg!
This is off-topic, but I completely agree. I remember one time walking past the Tai Chi class at my local school (they were doing chi-gung on one of the grassy commons), and I overheard a couple of football-jock-wannabe types commenting on how they could easily kick the shit out of anyone who studied such a pansy-ass martial art.
I asked them to stand on the ball of one foot (not flat-footed, but on the ball of the foot) and extend their other foot out while keeping their hands at their sides. They couldn't even stand on one foot, and I think they realized that it takes a bit more talent and strength to perform Tai Chi.
Having seen something similar in action, I'd bet on the exalted Grandmaster. Katas are practiced in slow motion to build technique and strength. Yes, strength. Try doing a head-high front kick at 1/20 the speed and see if you can keep your leg extended at head-height for more than a fraction of a second.
And if you believe that technique is unimportant compared to strength, might I invite you to visit the Skip Barber racing school and take the Econoline Van tour, where the instructor races one of the beginner students. The instructor gets an Econoline van, and the student is in a Corvette. I'll give you three guesses as to who wins, and the first two don't count.
It's the same thing in combat. Proper technique and speed will slaughter brute force any day of the week.
Too much love can be stifling. Too much happinines can make you ungaurded and easy to hurt.
I feel sorry for you if you really believe that.
No, he's right; think "spoiled child". Their parents love them *so* much that any thought of *possibly* hurting them goes right out the window, and any idea of discipline goes right with it. If you don't believe me, walk around in a supermarket for awhile, and observe the parents that are *begging* their kids to behave. Do you really think that a deeply ingrained response to tell figures of authority to go stuff themselves is going to be beneficial later in life?
"Screw you boss, I'm not doing that because I don't wanna," isn't the best way to keep a job.
Easily hurt can be seen in children that have had their self-esteem falsely reinforced. By only giving positive feedback, you spare a child temporary emotional pain and possible and/or perceived humiliation in front of their peers. The problem with this is that they come to expect it, which leads to a disassociation from reality -- the child expects to live in a wonderful, happy bubble, and whenever that bubble is threatened by an external entity (failing a test, rejection by a love-interest, etc.), they will lash out, often violently.
Sadly, if he gets put in a Federal prison, he's going to be doing a little forced P2P (Prisoner-to-Prisoner) networking of his own...
In the first case, the one where you were told to sign the contract during the interview, you could have signed it, and made a case in court that your signature was obtained under duress -- namely, that the company-in-question used unfair leverage (your *desperate* need for a job) to get you to sign a highly unfair contract. Contracts signed under duress aren't binding.
In the second case, I would have fired up OpenOffice (which handles Word DOC files just fine), struck out the portions I didn't like, then signed it and turned it in. I'd say there's a ninety-percent chance that they won't read it, and that it'll just be thrown in your employee file; if the time ever comes to take you into court, well, they don't have a leg to stand on.
More than *anything* else, I recommend purchasing good cutlery. You can easily spend a few thousand dollars on a set of knives that will last you a lifetime, but if you can drop something in the $500 range, I recommend the J.A. Henckels Vier Sterne (Four Star) series -- the blades are very high quality, freeze-hardened steel, and as long as you take proper care of them, they should last eternally.
If they don't, that's what the lifetime warranty is for.
On top of those, get two cutting boards -- a larger wood one for dealing with dry goods and vegetables, and a plastic one for dealing with meats (so it can be washed in the dishwasher, and because the blood won't soak into the plastic).
Ah, the "Promise them the moon, then give them Io." trick.
I'm assuming that by "Java", you mean JSP; anyone who uses an actual *Java* application to implement a *webapp* needs to be shot. Repeatedly.
That being said, there are a few reasons, actually. I do some development work in Java, but I'm also pretty well-versed in a variety of other languages; including C, C++, Perl, Assembly (x86 and good 'ole 68k), and PHP (and shell scripting, of course). Compared to PHP, JSP is a *pig*. It eats up a much larger chunk of memory, more CPU time, and is IMHO a terrible platform for developing small web-based applications. JSP+EJB does have its uses, but not in the arena of small webapps.
This is where PHP really shines; it's very fast, has a small footprint, and is *much* easier to use and debug than JSP is.
So, for writing huge, enterprise-level apps, JSP+EJB is the way to go. For writing smaller apps; things that need to be written quickly and securely, I'll stick with PHP.
Microsoft: Now with more exploited holes than a two-dollar hooker.
*sigh*
If only his name was John Libcrypt...
Condoms and a fake ID have already been mentioned; is there anything else a college student could want?