In my opinion (different than yours) computers involved in education should be focused on making sure students have a basic computer-use skill when they graduate. For example, the following things;
Using a keyboard quickly
Using a mouse and other pointing devices
Knowing the basic parts and what they do; display, peripherals, cabling,
what a modem does, what a network card does, memory, cpu and cooling
Not being afraid of the things
Having respect for the internet and that bad things and good things that
are out there
Knowing how to look stuff up, CD ROM, internet, whatever.
There are some things that I do not think are important, programming
languages or real 'computer science', working with hardware,
installing operating systems or applications. Classes for those things
should be available, but are not absolutely necessary for pre-college education.
'Computers'in high school means 'programming'to some
people, 'internet'to others and 'typing papers'to
others. So I think it is important to distinguish what skills kids need
and then go after them, not say 'computers in education' and hope it
comes out the same way one expects. (HanzoSan and I we expect computers to
do very different things in K-12 education.)
I do agree with you that adding a computer to learning basic geography will not
help if the basic geography information is not good, or if the teacher does not
know Libya from Iceland in the first place, a computer will not help.
Though there are some students that could probably use the infinite patience and
ability to repeat and go through variations that a computer can provide easily,
slapping ordinary class information onto a computer does no good.
I have been telling all my relatives and anybody else that might listen, that if
their kid gets to be looking for a job or enters college without knowing some
basic stuff about computers they might as well get a lobotomy and go sell fries
at McDonalds. People are NO USE to my business at all if they do not know
how to use a computer, I do not care if they are CPAs, HR, receptionist, or are
the best salesperson in the world. In my opinion having basic (see above)
computer skills are essential as basic hygiene nowadays, and not in the future
knowing a little bit about computers will be like the high-school diploma was in
the '80s. 'Don't have one? Ok. Get out, no job for you.'
Though I am wondering why they could not have a special mention slot for "Extreme PaintBrawl". The damn thing just didn't work, the printed cover was pretty though.
I had a Apple II version of that Pitfall game, it was called "Montazuma's Revenge" but the graphics were the same. We loved the levels and my dad thought the title was just hilarious. (Slang term for having "the runs".)
Thre are two nicknames; "Spectre" and "Spooky". If you can get a chance to see video of these things on TV, I'd recommend it, they can dish out amazing damage in a short period of time. (For those "Mail Call" junkies...)
Aliens; space marines drop in to investigate lost colony, battle many aliens and "nuke it from orbit, only way to be sure"
Alien 3 (the bitch is back); Ripley crashes on prison planet (leadworks) battles a single alien that hosted on a dog.
Alien Resurrection; Ripley is cloned 280 years later (with repeated failures) to have a baby (alien) and fight the aliens the weapons contractor has captured, while allied with some freighter misfits.
The Predator is a remotely controlled recon aircraft retrofitted with a targeting system and two hellfire missiles. (Same stuff Apache helicopers carry.) The aircraft itself does not damage anything, it simply serves as a platform that can fire hellfire missiles on targets once they have been spotted. Since there are several advantages to these things; including long flight times, zero risk of pilot injury, etc. the Predator can be described as a "war robot". (Though it is more like a remote controlled vehicle, as it is not autonomous.)
There is a similar but unarmed system that goes by another name that has been in use for years.
You have confused the ability to attack something via firing missiles with BEING a missile.
I also see no "conspiracy theory garbage" in referencing the Predator system, as it has been in the news and on the Discovery channel a lot; including a successful kill (in Yammen) of three Al Queda operatives (including one American citizen) a few weeks ago. It is a fully operational robotic (if remote control counts as robotic) weapon delivery system.
The only point here is that you missed the point of the hyperlink in the story because of your ignorance.
For those of you who are interested in this, you can visit Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal which publishes a '+5 Insightful' magazine the Sketpical Inquirerer. The magazine covers all sorts of crackpot type claims and shoots holes in them in a rigorous scientific way. (Including the fake moon landing conspiracy theories.)
For the most part, it is not the crackpots themselves, it is the damage and dilution they cause in the population of otherwise reasonable people. If you care a lot about it, why not donate a subscription of the magazine to a local high school or something.
Anybody pushing the "it's a fake" or "it might be a fake" looks like an ignorant moron. So I am quite surprised (and a little disgusted) that there are so many posts here yammering about how the moon missions were faked, or the photos were faked, or the rocks are fake. Coming from a group of people that continually yap about how terrible it is that the general population swallows the Microsoft marketing crap, how much damage it does, how much extra it costs, etc; it is ironic how easily some of you have swallowed worse lies than what Microsoft produces.
Final Doom was a Doom I engine with the first three eposodes, and then a fourth one tacked on. I am not 100% sure, but it was about 8 new levels that were complicated and had some pretty hard puzzles in them. (At least for me they were hard.)
I still go back and play DoomII sometimes, since it's easy to network and play, we use it to warm up while the last guy configures his PC for the LAN party. (Those pink potato-demons make the meanest noise I have heard in a game yet.)
So, you feel that taking photos from a public street is some sort or threat or harm against Ralsky?
So taking photos from a public street shows a lack of respect?
I have two things to say to your ridiculously ignorant point of view;
- those who want my respect shall earn it
- act as you would have others act upon you
(as one would reasonably expect others in one's own society to share the same values, you can expect others around you to act in manner similar to you)
Ralsky has already acted like a total asshole, he won't stop because of some pseudo-christian claptrap that depends on others having morals and a conscience to control their actions. The "turn the other cheek" stuff won't work on someone that won't eventually realize what they are doing wrong. It only works on people that wake up and "see" what they are doing is wrong.
Ralsky may change his ways, he may not. If he changes, it sure as hell won't be because someone was NICE to him. If he does not, people may take out their frustrations on him. He'll have to deal with that as part of the price of that big old (nasty looking) yuppie palace he bought himself.
Re:but no reall thrill
on
Robocoaster
·
· Score: 3, Funny
My thoughts exactly. Who wants to "ride" a paint shaker?
I had a discussion with the other geeks in my office a while back about how
fast we can ramp up the expectations of high-bandwidth amongst our
customers. We came to the conclusion that it is likely to be many years
before the high-bandwidth-everywhere (I mean more than 1 megabit per second) to
all homes and all businesses cheaply.
Here is why:
1. Assume you can light all that fiber and run it effectively around the
world
Companies would need to cooperate to light it
Places where there is not available fiber need to be provisioned (Some
parts of the United States for example)
Will need more guys around to maintain and work with the stuff
2. Connect the last mile
Wireless seems to be an interesting option, but will need to mature before being truely effective
Running fiber might work, but that's a LOT of fiber when you think about
how many homes there are, go back to 'there is no fiber' and start
again if you choose this option
Run copper using existing technology like Cable or DSL (but then, you are
dealing with Telcos/Cables which have a whole host of problems on their own)
3. Now that everyone has the capability, route the traffic
Assume that not everybody will use lots of bandwidth all the time, but
there will be HUGE peak capacity needs
which then, may cause the lit fiber to not be as under-used as it was
Usage will grow over time to meet the existing capacity as people realize
everybody is an LPB and they can store and move lots and lots of files,
trade more less compressed MP3s and video, porn, warez, PowerPoint
presentations in email, web masters all over the world get stupider and make
big flash animations, etc. (So demand for capacity goes way up from what it is now.)
Upgrade all the router points starting at the customer premises to
equipment that can handle it, cruddy Linksys can handle a T1, but not a T3.
Then, the CO needs to put in routers to handle peak capacity, dump all
those Cisco 2500s and buy loads of 7500s, because 45 guys in my neighborhood
at 1meg each will overload the existing equipment (Hint: that will cost
lots)
After all this, we came to the conclusion that dial-up is here to stay for
the duration of our careers; unless traffic is routed in a fundamentally
different way than it is now (more efficiently) or a revolution in router
technology happens so that a router box capable of handling the traffic
becomes dirt cheap, really small and fiber ready out of the box. Otherwise, no
ISP will ever be able to afford the routing requirements alone of high-bandwidth
for everybody even if the fiber is there and lit.
Any one of the steps or sub-steps can be a difficult problem to solve.
Though I would like to see it, I am convinced that the broadband for everybody
will be a slow (decades) and painful process.
Yeah. And we here at Slashdot keep a close eye on the only person in the world capable of holding enough material in his rectum for a good dirty bomb...
Re:RAID can mean different things...
on
IDE RAID Examined
·
· Score: 1
I always heard:
RAID
R edundant A rray of I nexpensive D isks
Alluding to the fact that if one drive fails you still have two others that have a complete set of the data in the array.
Where would random come into it? As far as I know you cannot pull out and re-arrange the disks...
- 38 degrees (F) is the freezing point, so it could stay liquid at tempatures that would be useful for a fridge or freezer. One probably could make it flow through a cooling system. (Although I have no idea how the heat transfer at both ends of the system would work.)
I doubt that Mercury would be something most people and environmentalists would approve of nowadays though. A fridge would use A LOT of mercury. It is dangerous to many organizms in tiny amounts, and would present a disposal or recycle problem when the appliance is replaced.
Do what I do, tell them "Accessibilty = Google Search Bot friendly". (At least to a point, the Section 508 Fed Guide goes a long way towards making a site really easy to be spidered.)
Our dorko-web customers eat that up and are then willing to spend a little money and time to do the accessibilty work if it means they get in Google or DMOZ or Yahoo faster, or get a better ranking when they do get there.
The best part is, near as I can tell it is true!
[Note that accessability !== identical for everybody; text navigation systems, transcriptions of video, alt image tags and so on help allow people and machines to visit the site any way they like, sighted or not.]
Smaller web sites tend to be multi-homed on the same IP, using the HTTP host-header to specify what virtual web to use for any given request.
So using the IP of a smaller site is likely to get a "Default" install page for the web server software, or to the hosting company's own web site. (Using a http://###.###.###.### request to an IP is one of the tricks that can be used to track down who is hosting some site you don't like, spammers or whatever.)
The only way to visit one of those without the DNS system would be to use a hosts file on the local machine so the HTTP header comes into the web server correctly. DNS servers are left out of the loop entirely in that case.
For small web sites, "no DNS" means "not on the net". (Big web sites probably have only one IP, so the IP address would work just fine in a browser, but how much database driven stuff looks at the URL to make sense about what to do...)
DNS and IP are complimentary system for allowing data transfer. DNS has a very different function; routing meaningful traffic (not just packets, but web sites and other services) to people, that sits over the IP stuff, which just cares about getting packets from one place to another.
My old-man (father) used to work in the paper industry. He had a story about touring a "clean" paper company in Finland that had some great scrubbers on their stacks, only clean steam came out of the mill, no air polution at all.
But on a tour, my old-man notices a big pipe dumping black crud into a little stream. He asks the guide about it. The reply was something along the lines of "Don't worry, 6 km from here that stream goes into Russia."
I believe you are forgetting something. Although the doubters are clearly an extreme minority (extreme in view and in number), similar groups have done some significant damage. For example; the educational system (and reputation) of the State of Kansas, the ability for a white guy wear his "hair" bald and have tatoos, for people to say what they want about Scientology, for Viagra to be paid for by medical insurance where "the pill" is not...
Although what they think is absolutely stupid and unimportant, the fact that they DO think what they do is important. They may be willing to modify school ciricula to remove the theory of evolution or fly airplanes into buildings, that makes the fact that they do think like they do important.
(The idea of SENDING them to the moon to make them believe is pretty appealing, maybe throw in a few boy-bands and make a TV show out of it!)
Although I disagree with the overall point of your post; that IT Professionals are not "real" professionals (quotes to signify using your definition of the word), I still find your post very interesting.
You just described exactly why I hate lawyers and CPAs in a way I have not been able to articulate before.
What you appear to be saying is: CPAs and Lawyers are paid more because they created an artificial bastion-ivory tower like system that lifts their "profession" (quotes, because I can't figure out how to spit in HTML) above the common unwashed masses. Excuse me, but that is not something to be proud about, is not good for the economy in general, and is so self-involved.
A REAL professional, acts in the best interest of the company they work for, not some soul-sucking guild.
The GOOD IT guys I know dont rely on mountains of little facts, or even keeping what they know from anybody else. They have an overall understanding of how the stuff is supposed to work, with a willingness to believe that sitting down and dicking with the thing will allow them to pick up the details required to make it work correctly.
I try to let anybody that wants the little facts to have them, and I try to tell everybody how to get good at IT (even our CPAs). The people that don't pick up useful knowledge are the ones that don't WANT to. That is fine with me, if there were not enough mentally damaged people out there and in my company, I would not have a job.
How to get to be a good IT guy is a pretty short list in my book:
Use Google
Do a wide variety of things to get the overall picture
Don't assume you know everything
Have the patience to try ALL the permutations if you can't figure it out
Read the manuals once in a while
Be able to type fast.
(the most important one) Like computers
Get any four of these, and you are well on your way already. Once far enough along to "get the overall picture" it's easy to do the rest.
Agreed, libraries should be safe environment for children where they can walk past the computers without seeing porn.
However, they are not your babysitting service. Children should not be "dropped off" and left to fend for themselves until they are old enough to deal responsibly with the rules therein;
- keep quiet and do not disturb others - keep away from the homeless people wandering through the bathrooms (here they do at least) - realize there is material for everybody there, with different points of view - know how to check out and return books in an undamaged state
Watching books and managing the library is the responsability of the librarians, not watching the children of irresponsible parents who like to "drop them off" there.
He was full of it if he meant visible light. Just having a pulse in one's body would preclude "less than one wavelength" of visible light. (400 ~ 700 nanometers)
However, light comes in many wavelengths, including some used by people that comes in dozens of meters. (ELF transmitters for submarines, common radio, etc.) Natural astronomical sources probably make light in wavelengths of kilometers.
Saying "within one wavelength of light" is meaningless unless you specify the wavelength or frequency of the light.
He was fooling the audience, no better than the "Stick out tounge and touch nose" trick.
(Hint: anybody can do it, stick out your tounge and touch your nose with your finger.)
Slashdot Mirror
In my opinion (different than yours) computers involved in education should be focused on making sure students have a basic computer-use skill when they graduate. For example, the following things;
- Using a keyboard quickly
- Using a mouse and other pointing devices
- Knowing the basic parts and what they do; display, peripherals, cabling,
what a modem does, what a network card does, memory, cpu and cooling
- Not being afraid of the things
- Having respect for the internet and that bad things and good things that
are out there
- Knowing how to look stuff up, CD ROM, internet, whatever.
There are some things that I do not think are important, programming languages or real 'computer science', working with hardware, installing operating systems or applications. Classes for those things should be available, but are not absolutely necessary for pre-college education. 'Computers'in high school means 'programming'to some people, 'internet'to others and 'typing papers'to others. So I think it is important to distinguish what skills kids need and then go after them, not say 'computers in education' and hope it comes out the same way one expects. (HanzoSan and I we expect computers to do very different things in K-12 education.)I do agree with you that adding a computer to learning basic geography will not help if the basic geography information is not good, or if the teacher does not know Libya from Iceland in the first place, a computer will not help. Though there are some students that could probably use the infinite patience and ability to repeat and go through variations that a computer can provide easily, slapping ordinary class information onto a computer does no good.
I have been telling all my relatives and anybody else that might listen, that if their kid gets to be looking for a job or enters college without knowing some basic stuff about computers they might as well get a lobotomy and go sell fries at McDonalds. People are NO USE to my business at all if they do not know how to use a computer, I do not care if they are CPAs, HR, receptionist, or are the best salesperson in the world. In my opinion having basic (see above) computer skills are essential as basic hygiene nowadays, and not in the future knowing a little bit about computers will be like the high-school diploma was in the '80s. 'Don't have one? Ok. Get out, no job for you.'
Yeah, Quake. That I won't be able to hide porn from my wife anymore simply because my computer screen faces the wall...
"Honey, what is all that blonde and pink stuff on your computer case?"
The list was interesting.
Though I am wondering why they could not have a special mention slot for "Extreme PaintBrawl". The damn thing just didn't work, the printed cover was pretty though.
I had a Apple II version of that Pitfall game, it was called "Montazuma's Revenge" but the graphics were the same. We loved the levels and my dad thought the title was just hilarious. (Slang term for having "the runs".)
More info on the AC-130 series:
i p.html
http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/AC_130H_U_Gunsh
Thre are two nicknames; "Spectre" and "Spooky". If you can get a chance to see video of these things on TV, I'd recommend it, they can dish out amazing damage in a short period of time. (For those "Mail Call" junkies...)
Alien; crew of Nostromo battles single alien.
Aliens; space marines drop in to investigate lost colony, battle many aliens and "nuke it from orbit, only way to be sure"
Alien 3 (the bitch is back); Ripley crashes on prison planet (leadworks) battles a single alien that hosted on a dog.
Alien Resurrection; Ripley is cloned 280 years later (with repeated failures) to have a baby (alien) and fight the aliens the weapons contractor has captured, while allied with some freighter misfits.
You are thinking of Alien Resurrection I think.
AC,
To point out what should be obvious;
The Predator is a remotely controlled recon aircraft retrofitted with a targeting system and two hellfire missiles. (Same stuff Apache helicopers carry.) The aircraft itself does not damage anything, it simply serves as a platform that can fire hellfire missiles on targets once they have been spotted. Since there are several advantages to these things; including long flight times, zero risk of pilot injury, etc. the Predator can be described as a "war robot". (Though it is more like a remote controlled vehicle, as it is not autonomous.)
There is a similar but unarmed system that goes by another name that has been in use for years.
You have confused the ability to attack something via firing missiles with BEING a missile.
I also see no "conspiracy theory garbage" in referencing the Predator system, as it has been in the news and on the Discovery channel a lot; including a successful kill (in Yammen) of three Al Queda operatives (including one American citizen) a few weeks ago. It is a fully operational robotic (if remote control counts as robotic) weapon delivery system.
The only point here is that you missed the point of the hyperlink in the story because of your ignorance.
Excellent point.
For those of you who are interested in this, you can visit Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal which publishes a '+5 Insightful' magazine the Sketpical Inquirerer. The magazine covers all sorts of crackpot type claims and shoots holes in them in a rigorous scientific way. (Including the fake moon landing conspiracy theories.)
For the most part, it is not the crackpots themselves, it is the damage and dilution they cause in the population of otherwise reasonable people. If you care a lot about it, why not donate a subscription of the magazine to a local high school or something.
Anybody pushing the "it's a fake" or "it might be a fake" looks like an ignorant moron. So I am quite surprised (and a little disgusted) that there are so many posts here yammering about how the moon missions were faked, or the photos were faked, or the rocks are fake. Coming from a group of people that continually yap about how terrible it is that the general population swallows the Microsoft marketing crap, how much damage it does, how much extra it costs, etc; it is ironic how easily some of you have swallowed worse lies than what Microsoft produces.
Final Doom was a Doom I engine with the first three eposodes, and then a fourth one tacked on. I am not 100% sure, but it was about 8 new levels that were complicated and had some pretty hard puzzles in them. (At least for me they were hard.)
I still go back and play DoomII sometimes, since it's easy to network and play, we use it to warm up while the last guy configures his PC for the LAN party. (Those pink potato-demons make the meanest noise I have heard in a game yet.)
So, you feel that taking photos from a public street is some sort or threat or harm against Ralsky?
So taking photos from a public street shows a lack of respect?
I have two things to say to your ridiculously ignorant point of view;
- those who want my respect shall earn it
- act as you would have others act upon you
(as one would reasonably expect others in one's own society to share the same values, you can expect others around you to act in manner similar to you)
Ralsky has already acted like a total asshole, he won't stop because of some pseudo-christian claptrap that depends on others having morals and a conscience to control their actions. The "turn the other cheek" stuff won't work on someone that won't eventually realize what they are doing wrong. It only works on people that wake up and "see" what they are doing is wrong.
Ralsky may change his ways, he may not. If he changes, it sure as hell won't be because someone was NICE to him. If he does not, people may take out their frustrations on him. He'll have to deal with that as part of the price of that big old (nasty looking) yuppie palace he bought himself.
My thoughts exactly. Who wants to "ride" a paint shaker?
My wife would think it was pretty fun.
I had a discussion with the other geeks in my office a while back about how fast we can ramp up the expectations of high-bandwidth amongst our customers. We came to the conclusion that it is likely to be many years before the high-bandwidth-everywhere (I mean more than 1 megabit per second) to all homes and all businesses cheaply.
Here is why:
1. Assume you can light all that fiber and run it effectively around the world
2. Connect the last mile
3. Now that everyone has the capability, route the traffic
After all this, we came to the conclusion that dial-up is here to stay for the duration of our careers; unless traffic is routed in a fundamentally different way than it is now (more efficiently) or a revolution in router technology happens so that a router box capable of handling the traffic becomes dirt cheap, really small and fiber ready out of the box. Otherwise, no ISP will ever be able to afford the routing requirements alone of high-bandwidth for everybody even if the fiber is there and lit.
Any one of the steps or sub-steps can be a difficult problem to solve. Though I would like to see it, I am convinced that the broadband for everybody will be a slow (decades) and painful process.
Yeah. And we here at Slashdot keep a close eye on the only person in the world capable of holding enough material in his rectum for a good dirty bomb...
I always heard:
RAID
R edundant
A rray of
I nexpensive
D isks
Alluding to the fact that if one drive fails you still have two others that have a complete set of the data in the array.
Where would random come into it? As far as I know you cannot pull out and re-arrange the disks...
Mercury.
- 38 degrees (F) is the freezing point, so it could stay liquid at tempatures that would be useful for a fridge or freezer. One probably could make it flow through a cooling system. (Although I have no idea how the heat transfer at both ends of the system would work.)
I doubt that Mercury would be something most people and environmentalists would approve of nowadays though. A fridge would use A LOT of mercury. It is dangerous to many organizms in tiny amounts, and would present a disposal or recycle problem when the appliance is replaced.
wapcaplet,
Do what I do, tell them "Accessibilty = Google Search Bot friendly". (At least to a point, the Section 508 Fed Guide goes a long way towards making a site really easy to be spidered.)
Our dorko-web customers eat that up and are then willing to spend a little money and time to do the accessibilty work if it means they get in Google or DMOZ or Yahoo faster, or get a better ranking when they do get there.
The best part is, near as I can tell it is true!
[Note that accessability !== identical for everybody; text navigation systems, transcriptions of video, alt image tags and so on help allow people and machines to visit the site any way they like, sighted or not.]
Smaller web sites tend to be multi-homed on the same IP, using the HTTP host-header to specify what virtual web to use for any given request.
So using the IP of a smaller site is likely to get a "Default" install page for the web server software, or to the hosting company's own web site. (Using a http://###.###.###.### request to an IP is one of the tricks that can be used to track down who is hosting some site you don't like, spammers or whatever.)
The only way to visit one of those without the DNS system would be to use a hosts file on the local machine so the HTTP header comes into the web server correctly. DNS servers are left out of the loop entirely in that case.
For small web sites, "no DNS" means "not on the net". (Big web sites probably have only one IP, so the IP address would work just fine in a browser, but how much database driven stuff looks at the URL to make sense about what to do...)
DNS and IP are complimentary system for allowing data transfer. DNS has a very different function; routing meaningful traffic (not just packets, but web sites and other services) to people, that sits over the IP stuff, which just cares about getting packets from one place to another.
Heh. Those evil Russians.
My old-man (father) used to work in the paper industry. He had a story about touring a "clean" paper company in Finland that had some great scrubbers on their stacks, only clean steam came out of the mill, no air polution at all.
But on a tour, my old-man notices a big pipe dumping black crud into a little stream. He asks the guide about it. The reply was something along the lines of "Don't worry, 6 km from here that stream goes into Russia."
There is give and take in the world you know.
Beautyon,
I believe you are forgetting something. Although the doubters are clearly an extreme minority (extreme in view and in number), similar groups have done some significant damage. For example; the educational system (and reputation) of the State of Kansas, the ability for a white guy wear his "hair" bald and have tatoos, for people to say what they want about Scientology, for Viagra to be paid for by medical insurance where "the pill" is not...
Although what they think is absolutely stupid and unimportant, the fact that they DO think what they do is important. They may be willing to modify school ciricula to remove the theory of evolution or fly airplanes into buildings, that makes the fact that they do think like they do important.
(The idea of SENDING them to the moon to make them believe is pretty appealing, maybe throw in a few boy-bands and make a TV show out of it!)
Shut the fuck up already you twat.
We saw it the first time, now fuck off.
Although I disagree with the overall point of your post; that IT Professionals are not "real" professionals (quotes to signify using your definition of the word), I still find your post very interesting.
You just described exactly why I hate lawyers and CPAs in a way I have not been able to articulate before.
What you appear to be saying is: CPAs and Lawyers are paid more because they created an artificial bastion-ivory tower like system that lifts their "profession" (quotes, because I can't figure out how to spit in HTML) above the common unwashed masses. Excuse me, but that is not something to be proud about, is not good for the economy in general, and is so self-involved.
A REAL professional, acts in the best interest of the company they work for, not some soul-sucking guild.
The GOOD IT guys I know dont rely on mountains of little facts, or even keeping what they know from anybody else. They have an overall understanding of how the stuff is supposed to work, with a willingness to believe that sitting down and dicking with the thing will allow them to pick up the details required to make it work correctly.
I try to let anybody that wants the little facts to have them, and I try to tell everybody how to get good at IT (even our CPAs). The people that don't pick up useful knowledge are the ones that don't WANT to. That is fine with me, if there were not enough mentally damaged people out there and in my company, I would not have a job.
How to get to be a good IT guy is a pretty short list in my book:
Get any four of these, and you are well on your way already. Once far enough along to "get the overall picture" it's easy to do the rest.
As for you, my sig says it all.
Agreed, libraries should be safe environment for children where they can walk past the computers without seeing porn.
However, they are not your babysitting service. Children should not be "dropped off" and left to fend for themselves until they are old enough to deal responsibly with the rules therein;
- keep quiet and do not disturb others
- keep away from the homeless people wandering through the bathrooms (here they do at least)
- realize there is material for everybody there, with different points of view
- know how to check out and return books in an undamaged state
Watching books and managing the library is the responsability of the librarians, not watching the children of irresponsible parents who like to "drop them off" there.
He was full of it if he meant visible light. Just having a pulse in one's body would preclude "less than one wavelength" of visible light. (400 ~ 700 nanometers)
However, light comes in many wavelengths, including some used by people that comes in dozens of meters. (ELF transmitters for submarines, common radio, etc.) Natural astronomical sources probably make light in wavelengths of kilometers.
Saying "within one wavelength of light" is meaningless unless you specify the wavelength or frequency of the light.
He was fooling the audience, no better than the "Stick out tounge and touch nose" trick.
(Hint: anybody can do it, stick out your tounge and touch your nose with your finger.)
Hmm. I'd almost pay for that, if it were something cheap enough to do daily.
On that note, here is another similar dude proposing to cut his own feet off live on the internet. Yum.
Yes! But they would end up working together because the anti-lock breaks would keep the drivers from crashing!
They would end up good frends and go on to retire abused Cue-Cat readers to a nice wooded ranch.
You got taxed on the purchases because Sears has a presence in your state somewhere. (One store would count.)
You will probably find that smaller organizations are less likely to have a local presence, and will therefore be less likely to charge sales tax.