Reasonable in that it is easiest, yes.
Reasonable that it is the most financially viable option, not necessarily. Not if you need a *lot* of certificates, like I do.
Reasonable, to pay VeriSign's extortion? No. No on principle.
There is no loss of encryption in not using an "big boy" (which I mean to be an established CA). My ssl is just as secure, in terms of encryption. My only disadvantage is that my visitors have to trust that I am me; I don't have to have VeriSign vouch for me. Arguably, since my CA private cert is in a safe, I am *more* secure, cause I don't have to worry about Verisign F-ing up like they did with MS.
While I frequently find valuable information in Oreilly's articles, such as this one,
this one is nothing but fluff; purely a plug for the author's book.
The exact info is available in the docs that come with OpenSSL, as well as in the OpenSSL animal book.
Not all databases (or more precisely, search techniques) operate on discrete sets of entities...
some types of heuristic searches could give an estimate much cheaper than a precise answer.
Could also be a probablistic thing... perhaps google knows (or assumes) that a given dataset is normally distributed... all they need is to take the first n entities (1000,10000, whatever), count the matches, and derive an estimate. In fact, this could easily be tabulated in a separate table when they build their indexes. (Think multiple dimensions, intersects of probabilities).
The point is... don't assume that "database" work means always operating deterministically on discrete sets of data.
Soon, I will be implementing an automated monitoring system for our web servers, etc.
I plan on using a 6 Sigma approach to monitor reponse times. After all, they do vary with load, and 6 Sigma is more adaptive than establishing a hard limit. Plus, it is trivial to implement (our web servers log to a Postgres server, so 90% of the work can be done with a well-written select...
6 Sigma is given a bad name by MBA types; it really is an extremely useful technique... don't let these naysayers discourage you! (but be sure you don't succumb to the 'every problem is a nail' dementia)
You know those things that they use in virtually all retail est. now, that they put in your CDs and DVDs to set the door alarm off?
You get some of the door alarms (ala sensormatic)... you could buy them new, but they can be had at going out of business sales and the like. Maybe you could get Wal-Mart, Target, etc to donate a couple, if you explain the situation... or at least procure them for you at a cheapo cost.
You have a virtually unlimited supply of the tags... just ask the casher to not scan them... and to watch you leave... when you buy a DVD, etc. Besides, they can't be that expensive, or they wouldn't stick em on every damned thing in the store.
Some of the more elaborate sensormatic systems are tcp/ip based... couldn't be that tough to wire it into a linux/bsd box. Those systems are even able to distinguish between the tags (used for rental stores)
I would say put the tag on the autistic child... so you get an alarm if he tries to leave, but I am left wondering how you would get it to stick to him (I mean, he would learn to just take it off...)... so maybe you could rig the alarm up backwards, so if the door opened, but no tag, then an alarm goes off. Or maybe you could put one in a bracelet/watch or something that he could not remove. (like the house arrest suggestions earlier in the thread).
good luck
My wife works "in that industry", so I have a clue, but am no expert...
I DO know, from my conversations with her, that a large clump of chargebacks, in one billing period, can cost a merchant their account... there is not really a grace period of any sort, necessarily... this is to help soften the blow from the "fly by night" scammers.
Thus, if a bunch of the people that likely got screwed in a similar fashion to our poster here asked for a chargeback, it would at least give the Theatre folks something to think about.
(My goal, after all, would not be to hurt them, just to teach them that their customers deserve to be treated fairly, and have recourse)
I know that they are only allowed a certain ratio of chargebacks to charges
I believe that other criteria exist, but am not certain of them; that seems to be the most important one.
Call Visa (or whomever) and ask for a charge-back.
Tell them the theater refused to honor the tickets.
They will refund your tickets.
Just as importantly...
Credit card merchants are evaluated on their chargebacks by Visa, et al.
Too many (too high a ratio, or too many total) and they lose their merchant account. Once gone, it is virtually impossible to get back.
Thus, MERCHANTS CARE ABOUT KEEPING CHARGEBACKS DOWN, which is one excellent incentive NOT to fuck your customers (at least those using cards).
This mechanism is in place to protect people in similar situations... make use of it.
When I was in school, I would modify command.com on the win95 workstations, put in my own (usually insulting) error messages, for the next user to enjoy:)
(The machines got restored every night, so no permanent harm was done)
And, my favorite error message (from ADO, v2ish): "An Error has Occured"
You are making an invalid analogy, e.g "Hidden cameras and microphones at the water cooler? Your office/cubicle? The bathroom?"
As I stated, I would not be OK with it, even if the users were allowed to *assume* privacy; there is nothing hidden, nothing secret. They are told upfront that they have no privacy as far as corporate communications go.
How are you comparing a bathroom to an email, anyway? The bathroom is maintained for the employees' convenience, the IT systems (e.g. email) are maintained for the business of the company, not for personal business.
The problem here is this seemingly pervasive belief that (particularly tech) people seem to have that they are entitled to privacy in everything that they do, and anywhere they are. I am an admitted introvert, and prize my privacy highly; but I don't maintain any illusions that I have any when I use a system, that my employer maintains for official communications, for personal business. That is just silly. You have an right to expect privacy in your home. You have a right to expect privacy in the bathroom. What is it that gives you the right to expect to expect your employer to provide you with email for your own personal use?
What's next? Someone sends personal information via the company's mail server, it gets cracked, the details of their torrid affair get out, and they sue the company for not securing their private communications?!
Besides all that, I have never secretly read another user's email, for any reason. But I still retain the ability, should a legitimate need arise; there is a difference in maintaining an ability and abusing it.
If they want to use Hotmail, or their own personal SMTP/POP3 server, and use ssl or s/mime, or pgp, or whatever, fine. I will even do what I can to facilitate that. But the company's email is exactly that, the company's email.
We make all of our users aware that the corp. systems are owned for the company's business; We don't enforce any "No Personal Business" clauses, but also make it known that there is *no* expectation of privacy on *any* of our systems...
We even log every message coming and going (the whole message, attachments and all), and I haven't one ethical qualm about it. I would, though, if the users were allowed to assume that "their" email was private.
You want privacy at work? Use Hotmail, etc. or an offsite POP3/IMAP with ssl support. Don't expect me to provide it for you; that is not my job.
From Linksys' site: "The Linksys Instant PowerLine? EtherFast®10/100 Bridge offers a complete Internet connection solution for your home powerline network. The PowerLine Bridge makes sharing your broadband access easier than ever. Build a strong and simple-to-use home network by taking advantage of the most pervasive home networking medium - powerlines.
The PowerLine Bridge is ideal for users who already have a router. It can be plugged into an Ethernet port on a router to equip a network with powerline capabilities and take advantage of the router's features. The PowerLine Bridge can also plug directly into a cable or DSL modem to allow Internet access and data transfer rates up to 14Mbps over home powerlines."
When I made this statement "So, I think that, in reality, a system that is representative of the state of the art should be selected, and used exclusively (except for the obvious exception of teaching points not implemented in that specimen... i.e., if you picked PostgreSQL, you would likely point to another system when discussing nested transactions)." I am referring to a single course. Of course I don't think that it is OK to select a single product and use it exclusively for your entire degree program;)
About that, I absolutely agree with you. If you teach me the priciples (ER diagrams, normalization, etc) I can get the implementation details (Oracle, PostgreSQL, etc) myself.
Note that in my comment I did not defend the teaching of any one vendor's product... (and the poster did not make a case that the school was doing that)... the point that I was trying to make was that it IS reasonable for the school to verify that one has minimal skills in current MS products; regardless of the ideals that any of us have about what the school should be teaching, from a philosophical point, the bottom line is that the schools are there to prepare its students for life/career.
Though I agree with you, in principle, in practice, is it realistic? One one hand, you can teach one DB (e.g.), get the implementation details out of the way, and concentrate on the theory and principles behind it.
On the other hand, you can teach a bunch of differenct DBs, so as to be fair to all market segments, and so as to give your students a broader "taste" of what is out there.
Now, obviously, in *theory*, the second approach is the best. But in practice, there is insufficient time in the classroom environment to cover enough of the implementation specific stuff for each DB, and still get in the necessary theory. It boils down to this: In an academic setting (and many others, come to think of it), to get depth, you must sacrifice breadth, and vice versa.
So I propose a third alternative: a reference implementation, that is truly relational, supports all of the differenct neato facilities that real world databases support, and is open source. A perfect RDBMS (from design/theoretical viewpoints).
But now your students are learning the implementation details of a system that they will never actually use in real life... wouldn't they have been better served mastering (or at least becoming familiar with) a system that they are likely to see?
So, I think that, in reality, a system that is representative of the state of the art should be selected, and used exclusively (except for the obvious exception of teaching points not implemented in that specimen... i.e., if you picked PostgreSQL, you would likely point to another system when discussing nested transactions).
Market share of software has everything to do with what is taught in schools... unless you are an LAS major, perhaps, you are there to learn a trade, if I am not mistaken. You are there to learn how to make a living. Sure, there are other things you should learn, and I wholeheartedly am for a well-rounded education. But the bottom line is that when you leave, you expect to be able to get and hold a job. They should teach what will best serve you in that respect, which is not necessarily going to be what meets someone's lofty ideals.
And for the record, my alma mater teaches exclusively with MS SQL and Access, and I am doing quite nicely in my Oracle job, because they concentrated on the Concepts.;)
Hydrochloric Acid == Muriatic Acid (even says it on the page you linked to) and it most certainly is commonly available at pool supply stores; is used to adjust the ph in pools.
I know because I have purchased it.
No comment on any "alternative uses" I might have had for it;)
What, exactly, is bullshit? I do, in fact, use Linux/FreeBSD exclusively. I do not own a single solitary machine with Windows, of any version, loaded on it, whatsoever. I simply have no use for it; I can accomplish all I need to with KDE3. So... how is this a troll? This is a legitimate opinion, based on my own, considerable experience in the field. I happen to think that it is a reasonable opinion; granted, it is not the self-righteous indignant rant of a zealot, mocking offense at that fact that the world has not yet adopted his *personal* choice of OS as the "One True" OS,...
If there is a troll, AC, it is your post, anonymous and with no justification,demonstration, or argument; a simple minded expletive, where an intelligent argument would have been more effective.
This is not a troll... I use Linux/FreeBSD exclusively; don't even own a Windoze box... BUT 1) requiring students to have a proficiency in MS Products in no way "forcing its students to exclusively use Microsoft's software?" The problem here is your [mis]use of the word "exclusively". 2) I am as pro OSS as anyone (except perhaps RMS;), but this is the real world. (Unfortunately, IMHO), windows is what is "out there", predominantly. While I am excited by the growth in Linux's market share, and anticipate the day MS is no longer an effective monopoly, I am realistic; One needs a minimal level of proficiency in MS Products to succeed. At work, we are a GNU Linux/FreeBSD shop; all servers, all development,EXCEPT for the workstations in Sales, which are Win2000... So, even though I am a "Unix Guy", I still have to deal with Windows, which is the case in, I suspect, virtually any job (hell, even if you are a web developer in a strictly Unix Server environment, you STILL should test on Windows browsers!!)
So... What exactly is your problem here? do you think you should be graduated ignorant of the OS with the *vastly* greater market share? What would *that* say about your school?
http://www.accurint.com I worked on this system, until I was laid off;) Seriously, I am not sure how much I can tell you about it, but I will say that those who have "Big Brother" concerns would go absolutely apeshit over it... I am sure that if it wasn't able to locate her for you, it would provide information that would be useful in the search. You have to meet certain legal requirements to use it (I don't remember the details), but if you don't meet them, a PI would... find yourself a PI who has access to it,... a PI would be a wise move on your part in any event... (I am sure that there are other systems with similar capability... DBT comes to mind...)
I had the same thing happen to me... sign this (which says I won't sue, etc) if you want your severence... Told em to "stick your severence up your ass". Then they asked me for my badge. When I asked when I would get my personal belongings back, they said I could make an appointment "next week" with HR to get it... Told em they could "make an appointment to get their fucking badge back next week"... can you believe they wanted the badge back bad enough to send me to my cube with an escort to get my stuff?;)
I did exactly what you are contemplating. Instead of 2 minors (who cares what you minored in?) I picked up a Math Major to go along with my CS Degree... The Math degree has done more for me. CS Degrees are a dime a dozen, but the double with Math is not as common. Not to mention the additional skills I picked up in the process have been useful. Besides, there are plenty of clueless persons with CS degrees out there (I know quite a few), but I think that there is an 'aura' about a Math degree... non-techies probably never took a *real* CS course, but they undoubtedly remember how painful their Math classes were (some people pull their hair out in Algebra;), and have a little respect for someone who managed a degree in it...
Slashdot Mirror
Reasonable in that it is easiest, yes. Reasonable that it is the most financially viable option, not necessarily. Not if you need a *lot* of certificates, like I do. Reasonable, to pay VeriSign's extortion? No. No on principle. There is no loss of encryption in not using an "big boy" (which I mean to be an established CA). My ssl is just as secure, in terms of encryption. My only disadvantage is that my visitors have to trust that I am me; I don't have to have VeriSign vouch for me. Arguably, since my CA private cert is in a safe, I am *more* secure, cause I don't have to worry about Verisign F-ing up like they did with MS.
While I frequently find valuable information in Oreilly's articles, such as this one, this one is nothing but fluff; purely a plug for the author's book. The exact info is available in the docs that come with OpenSSL, as well as in the OpenSSL animal book.
Not all databases (or more precisely, search techniques) operate on discrete sets of entities ...
some types of heuristic searches could give an estimate much cheaper than a precise answer.
Could also be a probablistic thing ... perhaps google knows (or assumes) that a given dataset is normally distributed ... all they need is to take the first n entities (1000,10000, whatever), count the matches, and derive an estimate. In fact, this could easily be tabulated in a separate table when they build their indexes. (Think multiple dimensions, intersects of probabilities).
The point is ... don't assume that "database" work means always operating deterministically on discrete sets of data.
Soon, I will be implementing an automated monitoring system for our web servers, etc. I plan on using a 6 Sigma approach to monitor reponse times. After all, they do vary with load, and 6 Sigma is more adaptive than establishing a hard limit. Plus, it is trivial to implement (our web servers log to a Postgres server, so 90% of the work can be done with a well-written select ...
6 Sigma is given a bad name by MBA types; it really is an extremely useful technique ... don't let these naysayers discourage you! (but be sure you don't succumb to the 'every problem is a nail' dementia)
You know those things that they use in virtually all retail est. now, that they put in your CDs and DVDs to set the door alarm off? You get some of the door alarms (ala sensormatic) ... you could buy them new, but they can be had at going out of business sales and the like. Maybe you could get Wal-Mart, Target, etc to donate a couple, if you explain the situation ... or at least procure them for you at a cheapo cost.
You have a virtually unlimited supply of the tags ... just ask the casher to not scan them ... and to watch you leave ... when you buy a DVD, etc. Besides, they can't be that expensive, or they wouldn't stick em on every damned thing in the store.
Some of the more elaborate sensormatic systems are tcp/ip based ... couldn't be that tough to wire it into a linux/bsd box. Those systems are even able to distinguish between the tags (used for rental stores)
I would say put the tag on the autistic child ... so you get an alarm if he tries to leave, but I am left wondering how you would get it to stick to him (I mean, he would learn to just take it off ...) ... so maybe you could rig the alarm up backwards, so if the door opened, but no tag, then an alarm goes off. Or maybe you could put one in a bracelet/watch or something that he could not remove. (like the house arrest suggestions earlier in the thread).
good luck
My wife works "in that industry", so I have a clue, but am no expert ...
I DO know, from my conversations with her, that a large clump of chargebacks, in one billing period, can cost a merchant their account ... there is not really a grace period of any sort, necessarily ... this is to help soften the blow from the "fly by night" scammers.
Thus, if a bunch of the people that likely got screwed in a similar fashion to our poster here asked for a chargeback, it would at least give the Theatre folks something to think about.
(My goal, after all, would not be to hurt them, just to teach them that their customers deserve to be treated fairly, and have recourse)
I know that they are only allowed a certain ratio of chargebacks to charges
I believe that other criteria exist, but am not certain of them; that seems to be the most important one.
Call Visa (or whomever) and ask for a charge-back. Tell them the theater refused to honor the tickets. They will refund your tickets. Just as importantly... Credit card merchants are evaluated on their chargebacks by Visa, et al. Too many (too high a ratio, or too many total) and they lose their merchant account. Once gone, it is virtually impossible to get back. Thus, MERCHANTS CARE ABOUT KEEPING CHARGEBACKS DOWN, which is one excellent incentive NOT to fuck your customers (at least those using cards). This mechanism is in place to protect people in similar situations... make use of it.
I did. He couldn't, and just left me the hardware to set up myself ;)
When I was in school, I would modify command.com on the win95 workstations, put in my own (usually insulting) error messages, for the next user to enjoy :)
(The machines got restored every night, so no permanent harm was done)
And, my favorite error message (from ADO, v2ish):
"An Error has Occured"
You are making an invalid analogy, e.g "Hidden cameras and microphones at the water cooler? Your office/cubicle? The bathroom?"
As I stated, I would not be OK with it, even if the users were allowed to *assume* privacy; there is nothing hidden, nothing secret. They are told upfront that they have no privacy as far as corporate communications go.
How are you comparing a bathroom to an email, anyway? The bathroom is maintained for the employees' convenience, the IT systems (e.g. email) are maintained for the business of the company, not for personal business.
The problem here is this seemingly pervasive belief that (particularly tech) people seem to have that they are entitled to privacy in everything that they do, and anywhere they are. I am an admitted introvert, and prize my privacy highly; but I don't maintain any illusions that I have any when I use a system, that my employer maintains for official communications, for personal business. That is just silly. You have an right to expect privacy in your home. You have a right to expect privacy in the bathroom. What is it that gives you the right to expect to expect your employer to provide you with email for your own personal use?
What's next? Someone sends personal information via the company's mail server, it gets cracked, the details of their torrid affair get out, and they sue the company for not securing their private communications?!
Besides all that, I have never secretly read another user's email, for any reason. But I still retain the ability, should a legitimate need arise; there is a difference in maintaining an ability and abusing it.
If they want to use Hotmail, or their own personal SMTP/POP3 server, and use ssl or s/mime, or pgp, or whatever, fine. I will even do what I can to facilitate that. But the company's email is exactly that, the company's email.
We make all of our users aware that the corp. systems are owned for the company's business; We don't enforce any "No Personal Business" clauses, but also make it known that there is *no* expectation of privacy on *any* of our systems ...
We even log every message coming and going (the whole message, attachments and all), and I haven't one ethical qualm about it. I would, though, if the users were allowed to assume that "their" email was private.
You want privacy at work? Use Hotmail, etc. or an offsite POP3/IMAP with ssl support. Don't expect me to provide it for you; that is not my job.
From Linksys' site:
"The Linksys Instant PowerLine? EtherFast®10/100 Bridge offers a complete Internet connection solution for your home powerline network. The PowerLine Bridge makes sharing your broadband access easier than ever. Build a strong and simple-to-use home network by taking advantage of the most pervasive home networking medium - powerlines.
The PowerLine Bridge is ideal for users who already have a router. It can be plugged into an Ethernet port on a router to equip a network with powerline capabilities and take advantage of the router's features. The PowerLine Bridge can also plug directly into a cable or DSL modem to allow Internet access and data transfer rates up to 14Mbps over home powerlines."
I agree that that is what it *should* be, just not that that is what is *is*, practically speaking.
:)
I think that I am a better, more well rounded person for having studied humanities, literature, etc. in college...
But my primary expectations were career related
by Bertrand Myer
Eiffel is used for the examples, but it is a comprehensive work on OO Design applicable to any OO language.
Definitely worth reading.
When I made this statement "So, I think that, in reality, a system that is representative of the state of the art should be selected, and used exclusively (except for the obvious exception of teaching points not implemented in that specimen ... i.e., if you picked PostgreSQL, you would likely point to another system when discussing nested transactions)." I am referring to a single course. Of course I don't think that it is OK to select a single product and use it exclusively for your entire degree program ;)
About that, I absolutely agree with you. If you teach me the priciples (ER diagrams, normalization, etc) I can get the implementation details (Oracle, PostgreSQL, etc) myself.
... (and the poster did not make a case that the school was doing that)... the point that I was trying to make was that it IS reasonable for the school to verify that one has minimal skills in current MS products; regardless of the ideals that any of us have about what the school should be teaching, from a philosophical point, the bottom line is that the schools are there to prepare its students for life/career.
... wouldn't they have been better served mastering (or at least becoming familiar with) a system that they are likely to see?
... i.e., if you picked PostgreSQL, you would likely point to another system when discussing nested transactions).
...
;)
Note that in my comment I did not defend the teaching of any one vendor's product
Though I agree with you, in principle, in practice, is it realistic?
One one hand, you can teach one DB (e.g.), get the implementation details out of the way, and concentrate on the theory and principles behind it.
On the other hand, you can teach a bunch of differenct DBs, so as to be fair to all market segments, and so as to give your students a broader "taste" of what is out there.
Now, obviously, in *theory*, the second approach is the best. But in practice, there is insufficient time in the classroom environment to cover enough of the implementation specific stuff for each DB, and still get in the necessary theory. It boils down to this: In an academic setting (and many others, come to think of it), to get depth, you must sacrifice breadth, and vice versa.
So I propose a third alternative: a reference implementation, that is truly relational, supports all of the differenct neato facilities that real world databases support, and is open source. A perfect RDBMS (from design/theoretical viewpoints).
But now your students are learning the implementation details of a system that they will never actually use in real life
So, I think that, in reality, a system that is representative of the state of the art should be selected, and used exclusively (except for the obvious exception of teaching points not implemented in that specimen
Market share of software has everything to do with what is taught in schools
unless you are an LAS major, perhaps, you are there to learn a trade, if I am not mistaken. You are there to learn how to make a living. Sure, there are other things you should learn, and I wholeheartedly am for a well-rounded education. But the bottom line is that when you leave, you expect to be able to get and hold a job. They should teach what will best serve you in that respect, which is not necessarily going to be what meets someone's lofty ideals.
And for the record,
my alma mater teaches exclusively with MS SQL and Access, and I am doing quite nicely in my Oracle job, because they concentrated on the Concepts.
Hydrochloric Acid == Muriatic Acid
;)
(even says it on the page you linked to)
and it most certainly is commonly available at pool supply stores; is used to adjust the ph in pools.
I know because I have purchased it.
No comment on any "alternative uses" I might have had for it
What, exactly, is bullshit? ... how is this a troll? This is a legitimate opinion, based on my own, considerable experience in the field. I happen to think that it is a reasonable opinion; granted, it is not the self-righteous indignant rant of a zealot, mocking offense at that fact that the world has not yet adopted his *personal* choice of OS as the "One True" OS, ...
I do, in fact, use Linux/FreeBSD exclusively. I do not own a single solitary machine with Windows, of any version, loaded on it, whatsoever. I simply have no use for it; I can accomplish all I need to with KDE3.
So
If there is a troll, AC, it is your post, anonymous and with no justification,demonstration, or argument; a simple minded expletive, where an intelligent argument would have been more effective.
This is not a troll ... I use Linux/FreeBSD exclusively; don't even own a Windoze box ... BUT ;), but this is the real world. (Unfortunately, IMHO), windows is what is "out there", predominantly. While I am excited by the growth in Linux's market share, and anticipate the day MS is no longer an effective monopoly, I am realistic; One needs a minimal level of proficiency in MS Products to succeed. At work, we are a GNU Linux/FreeBSD shop; all servers, all development,EXCEPT for the workstations in Sales, which are Win2000 ... So, even though I am a "Unix Guy", I still have to deal with Windows, which is the case in, I suspect, virtually any job (hell, even if you are a web developer in a strictly Unix Server environment, you STILL should test on Windows browsers!!)
... What exactly is your problem here? do you think you should be graduated ignorant of the OS with the *vastly* greater market share? What would *that* say about your school?
1) requiring students to have a proficiency in MS Products in no way "forcing its students to exclusively use Microsoft's software?" The problem here is your [mis]use of the word "exclusively".
2) I am as pro OSS as anyone (except perhaps RMS
So
PS ... if you CAN meet the legal requirements, it is extremely inexpensive!
http://www.accurint.com ;) ... I am sure that if it wasn't able to locate her for you, it would provide information that would be useful in the search. You have to meet certain legal requirements to use it (I don't remember the details), but if you don't meet them, a PI would ... find yourself a PI who has access to it, ... a PI would be a wise move on your part in any event... (I am sure that there are other systems with similar capability ... DBT comes to mind ...)
I worked on this system, until I was laid off
Seriously, I am not sure how much I can tell you about it, but I will say that those who have "Big Brother" concerns would go absolutely apeshit over it
Good Luck
that noone opened those drawers since they were last shut ...
SouthPark, as far as I know ... remember the underwear-stealing gnomes?
I had the same thing happen to me ... sign this (which says I won't sue, etc) if you want your severence ... Told em to "stick your severence up your ass". Then they asked me for my badge. When I asked when I would get my personal belongings back, they said I could make an appointment "next week" with HR to get it ... ... can you believe they wanted the badge back bad enough to send me to my cube with an escort to get my stuff? ;)
Told em they could "make an appointment to get their fucking badge back next week"
Like my good ole daddy says,
Fuck 'em.
I did exactly what you are contemplating. Instead of 2 minors (who cares what you minored in?) I picked up a Math Major to go along with my CS Degree ... The Math degree has done more for me. CS Degrees are a dime a dozen, but the double with Math is not as common. Not to mention the additional skills I picked up in the process have been useful. Besides, there are plenty of clueless persons with CS degrees out there (I know quite a few), but I think that there is an 'aura' about a Math degree ... non-techies probably never took a *real* CS course, but they undoubtedly remember how painful their Math classes were (some people pull their hair out in Algebra ;), and have a little respect for someone who managed a degree in it ...
just my $.02