I don't know if this will help you or not, but things aren't any better for the Nashville, TN area job market. I've had a couple of offers, but many of my peers haven't been able to even get an interview. It's not that these people aren't any good at what they do, but evidently they're just not good enough.
I'm nearing graduation. There was a "career fair" at my university recently. Far too many of the companies that were there said they weren't hiring right now, and most of those weren't even taking resumes. The rumor is that they were paid to set up a booth, but that's another story. The point is that a lot of companies just aren't hiring right now.
Another reply to your message suggested looking for government work. I mostly agree. It'd be a good hold-over until something better opens up, at least.
The strange thing about this is that I had to give a presentation about 3G just last week, the day of the attacks. This information would have made my point more effectively.
very few people are actually *using* Netscape/Mozilla anymore. That means an equal few are using its components. Add to that the advances Microsoft has made with IE in Pocket PC 2.0 (full Media Player functionality) and this particular open source team is, unfortunately, playing catchup.
What, if anything, does a pitiful, scaled-down, pseudo-browser for a handheld have to do with Mozilla?
They need a *fully-functional, fully-crashproof* browser to put on a multitude of devices. Microsoft took 5.5 tries to get it right
"A multitude of devices" is hardly the phrase that comes to mind when thinking of IE. Windows desktop and Windows handheld. In my book, that's two platforms. That's nothing compared to the actual multitude of platforms on which Mozilla runs.
MS finally got an OS stable (Windows 2000) when they were beginning to lose share in the server market
Given the multitude of security problems in the last few months causing windows machines to drop like flies, I think some people might argue with you on "stable."
I would argue about stability on a different point. I'm running Windows 2000 on several of the computers I administer. Yes, in some cases, it's done its job very well. On others, stability is a joke. If I can go two days without having a complete lock-up, we consider it a winning week. Two days is certainly longer than most of their other operating systems, but somehow still doesn't compare favorably to my linux boxen. Yes, Windows 2000 has worked well in some situations, and no, I'm not going to sit here and scream that Microsoft produces nothing but bad products. But I do think it's important to note where their products do fail, and not continue to use them just because they have the pretty windows logo on the box.
Spell checkers are useless; if you don't want spelling mistakes in your documents, learn to spell. It's not difficult
Spell checkers catch typos. Can't remember if you need an "i" or an "e"? A spell checker puts you well on your way. They're far from useless. If you don't feel you need one, don't use it. The rest of the business world will continue to make use of this tool.
For a solid benchmark, you're right. That's exactly what we should do. Load up 600 contacts into each one, and see how long it takes to load and search that kind of data.
However, I'm not sure that a solid benchmark means as much on a handheld as it does on a workstation or server. A handheld doesn't have to scale well. In most cases, it doesn't have to worry too much about running next year's applications. If it's acceptable out of the box, it'll be good a year from now.
I only have about 120 contacts in my address book right now. Since both the iPaq and Palm load the address book application instantly, it's safe to say they both fill my needs in that area. For me, it comes down to an issue of application features (or lack of features, as seems to make me happier with my Palm).
Technically, you're right, loading a huge database on both devices would tell us exactly where optimizations have been done. In fact, I'd really like to see numbers on that.
For roughly the same price, the storage is far bigger, the applications are far, far better (Hmm.. Useless notes program, or pocket word?), and the processor is much faster (I don't see any palm devices playing mpeg video any time soon)
As an iPaq owner, I'm typically happy with my device. However, I think it's important to point out a few things when comparing it to a Palm device.
First, Pocket Word is so scaled down that about the only thing it's got better than notepad is bold, italics and underline. You can do some basic formatting on the handheld, but things like tables are missing. Essentials like spell checking are missing as well. It's nice to view Word documents on the handheld, but in all honesty, I got more real work done with my Palm and Memopad than I have with Pocket Word.
Second, the speed issue is important to consider. Yes, my iPaq can play mpeg movies. But the screen just isn't that good, so the movies are typically blurry. Aside from that, the iPaq really needs that kind of power because the operating system has so much overhead, and the applications are not optimized. I can start any application on my Palm as fast as I can on my iPaq. The issue is optimization and overhead, I think, rather than what a person (or device) can actually get done.
Now, don't misunderstand. I don't dislike my iPaq, but when I carry both around, I have to stop and wonder which one really is the more useful device. If I need Word and Excel, I typically need full versions of them, so a notebook is more appropriate... My iPaq is fun, but my next handheld purchase will be a PalmOS device.
Maybe I'm missing something here. Does spam really work as an advertising method? When I get spam, I delete it. I've never purchased a product or service, directly or indirectly, because of spam. Are there people out there that really say, "Wow, I can get 50% off a pair of used socks! I'd better buy these right now!" ???
I know that sending spam is pretty low-cost for these companies, but if they're not seeing any return, it's still a bad investment. Are there any numbers of how effective spam really is? And if a Slashdotter has purchased something because of spam (not because of something you asked to receive), please post it. I'm anxious to hear stories about that.
Are you nuts? The school system does NOT owe the kid money...
Based on the comment you were replying to, there actually is ground for arguing that the student may be owed money. If the teacher was perceived as having agency for the school, the school could be responsible. Anyone who's had even the most basic law class can tell you that. Agency is a dangerous thing.
Following this line of thought, if the teacher was believed to speak for the school, and now the school is refusing to pay, there could be charges of promissory estoppel, which could lead to even more problems for the school.
I'm by no stretch a lawyer, but anyone who's ever taken an 8th grade law class, let alone anything more advanced, would have studied these things.
No, but on the other hand if you're "in public", there's a certain understanding that people will see you, and they may even talk to you or bump into you on the street. None of those things constitute criminal actions.
Talking or bumping into is one thing. Looking through your pockets to see what you're carrying is something else. If someone comes up and asks me what time it is, that's fine. If someone comes up and asks me what time it is, what kind of car I drive, where my house is, what type of locks I have on that house, how much money is in my wallet, and where my kids are... well, that's just a hair out of bounds. Not illegal, perhaps, but certainly rude. I see port scanning as the same thing.
Likewise, if you're hooked up to the public network, you can expect to sometimes get packets from other machines. If you don't like the
Getting some packets is one thing, but getting a thousand packets from one guy who's just trying to find information about my machine is (IMHO) something else.
There's a difference between attacking your machine, and just port scanning it.
Attacking isn't even a question -- I think we probably all agree that's deserved some punishment. I guess I just see a port scan as gathering intelligence about a target. In the real world, you hire a security guard to walk around your offices at night and make sure nothing's wrong (scanning your own network). But if some other guys walks in and starts checking stuff out (someone else scanning your network) you're going to be ticked.
The simple solution is just what you said -- run a firewall. I guess I'm just speaking for more of an idealist standpoint. In an ideal world, I wouldn't need a firewall. And I wouldn't need to lock the door to my house, either. So while we're going to have to live with port scanning, I just don't see it as something that should be acceptable for folks to do to me...
It's the equivalent of a burglar checking your doors and windows looking for one that's not locked.
If some thug walks up to your front door and starts rattling the the knob, there's grounds for calling the authorities. You're exactly right, and there should be similar grounds for port scanning. To paraphrase the Code of Computer Use at my university, 'Authority to use a computer is granted solely by the owner of that computer. Just because you have a password doesn't give you the right to use it.' Port scanning uses resources on my computer (even if not significant). So in my mind, if somoene is using resources and I didn't tell them it was okay, something's wrong.
I admit that you make valid points, but if youre connected to the internet, youre part of everyone's network. If you don't want that kind of traffic, pull the plug. IMHO, I think that if you are part of the internet, there are a few things that youre going to have to put up with.
You're connected to everyone's socient. If you get tired of people trying to steal your car, I suggest you get rid of it. Because owning a car in everyone's society, this is just something you have to put up with.
I hate to be sarcastic, but come on. Just because you're using a public resource doesn't mean everyone else using that resource has the right to your stuff. If I'm driving down the highway, someone can't just get in my car.
Who wants to wait for some gigantic 2 MB Javascript ad to load, especially when you're putting along on a modem?
I have cable, and I don't want to deal with 2 MB ads constantly. Living out in the middle of nowhere, we still get charged based on usage. Any time I'm forced to download something I didn't ask for (banner ads, pop-up windows, flashy animated gifs...), someone is charging me for the privilege of showing me ads. If these ads become larger and more invasive, you can bet the farm that it'll piss me off. I have zero interest in paying for someone else to show me their products.
Drive space won't be an issue, no. But bandwidth might be. When you download a song, you probably shoot for the fastest person that has what you're looking for. If BMG's giant file server has a tiny pipe, great, we can download this song, but at 348 bytes a second, I'm probably not going to...
I come from a law enforcement family. As such, I talk to a lot of law enforcement officers. None of them I've talked to have thought gun control laws made any difference. To paraphrase one, "the people who can't buy a gun on a whim today aren't the same people who are shooting at me." So if the laws aren't doing any good, what's the point behind them?
Control. We fought the British and won. How would that fight have gone if no American had owned a gun? Our government is just trying to watch their backs. Keep folks from having guns, and they can't fight back when we roll into their town to violate their other rights.
Are we sure this is legit? Huge parts of this thing look too much like Win2000 for me to be convinced this isn't someone's idea of "good use of free time" and Gimp. Yeah, the "enhanced" parts look good, but against the backdrop that looks almost exactly like w2k... It's enough to send up a red flag in my book...
>In any case, affirmative action is bordering on >sexism.
Encourage a female, it's called progress. Encourage a male, it's called sexist.
I'm all about equality, but this isn't equality. They're actively recruiting female CS majors, rather than just CS majors. There will never be equality as long as people are pushing for their group (whatever sex or race that may be) to be placed above everyone else.
Evidently I'm sexist, because I refuse to acknowledge that I owe every "minority" something just because I'm a white male.
You're exactly right. They're assuming that everyone will "upgrade" to SDMI and mp3 will just disappear. Mp3 is out, and no matter what they do, they won't be able to kill it. Players are open source. Encoders are open source. If there's a way to kill either or both, I'd sure like to see it.
In the future, you'll have to buy your music in SDMI format? Fine. Someone'll buy it, record it as mp3, and post it right back on the 'net. End result? Nothing's changed.
I absolutely agree. Online ordering sure isn't that much more convenient. I can typically run down to my local book or software store and pick up what I need and have it the same day, rather than waiting a week or two to get it shipped to me. It's the money I save that makes me willing to wait. If I'm suddenly paying just as much to get it online, I'll just run to the local store and save myself the troulbe. Even if I'm only saving a couple of bucks, I'll still go local, because the "have it right now" factor is usually worth a couple of bucks.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if this will help you or not, but things aren't any better for the Nashville, TN area job market. I've had a couple of offers, but many of my peers haven't been able to even get an interview. It's not that these people aren't any good at what they do, but evidently they're just not good enough.
I'm nearing graduation. There was a "career fair" at my university recently. Far too many of the companies that were there said they weren't hiring right now, and most of those weren't even taking resumes. The rumor is that they were paid to set up a booth, but that's another story. The point is that a lot of companies just aren't hiring right now.
Another reply to your message suggested looking for government work. I mostly agree. It'd be a good hold-over until something better opens up, at least.
The strange thing about this is that I had to give a presentation about 3G just last week, the day of the attacks. This information would have made my point more effectively.
very few people are actually *using* Netscape/Mozilla anymore. That means an equal few are using its components. Add to that the advances Microsoft has made with IE in Pocket PC 2.0 (full Media Player functionality) and this particular open source team is, unfortunately, playing catchup.
What, if anything, does a pitiful, scaled-down, pseudo-browser for a handheld have to do with Mozilla?
They need a *fully-functional, fully-crashproof* browser to put on a multitude of devices. Microsoft took 5.5 tries to get it right
"A multitude of devices" is hardly the phrase that comes to mind when thinking of IE. Windows desktop and Windows handheld. In my book, that's two platforms. That's nothing compared to the actual multitude of platforms on which Mozilla runs.
MS finally got an OS stable (Windows 2000) when they were beginning to lose share in the server market
Given the multitude of security problems in the last few months causing windows machines to drop like flies, I think some people might argue with you on "stable."
I would argue about stability on a different point. I'm running Windows 2000 on several of the computers I administer. Yes, in some cases, it's done its job very well. On others, stability is a joke. If I can go two days without having a complete lock-up, we consider it a winning week. Two days is certainly longer than most of their other operating systems, but somehow still doesn't compare favorably to my linux boxen. Yes, Windows 2000 has worked well in some situations, and no, I'm not going to sit here and scream that Microsoft produces nothing but bad products. But I do think it's important to note where their products do fail, and not continue to use them just because they have the pretty windows logo on the box.
Spell checkers are useless; if you don't want spelling mistakes in your documents, learn to spell. It's not difficult
Spell checkers catch typos. Can't remember if you need an "i" or an "e"? A spell checker puts you well on your way. They're far from useless. If you don't feel you need one, don't use it. The rest of the business world will continue to make use of this tool.
For a solid benchmark, you're right. That's exactly what we should do. Load up 600 contacts into each one, and see how long it takes to load and search that kind of data.
However, I'm not sure that a solid benchmark means as much on a handheld as it does on a workstation or server. A handheld doesn't have to scale well. In most cases, it doesn't have to worry too much about running next year's applications. If it's acceptable out of the box, it'll be good a year from now.
I only have about 120 contacts in my address book right now. Since both the iPaq and Palm load the address book application instantly, it's safe to say they both fill my needs in that area. For me, it comes down to an issue of application features (or lack of features, as seems to make me happier with my Palm).
Technically, you're right, loading a huge database on both devices would tell us exactly where optimizations have been done. In fact, I'd really like to see numbers on that.
As an iPaq owner, I'm typically happy with my device. However, I think it's important to point out a few things when comparing it to a Palm device.
First, Pocket Word is so scaled down that about the only thing it's got better than notepad is bold, italics and underline. You can do some basic formatting on the handheld, but things like tables are missing. Essentials like spell checking are missing as well. It's nice to view Word documents on the handheld, but in all honesty, I got more real work done with my Palm and Memopad than I have with Pocket Word.
Second, the speed issue is important to consider. Yes, my iPaq can play mpeg movies. But the screen just isn't that good, so the movies are typically blurry. Aside from that, the iPaq really needs that kind of power because the operating system has so much overhead, and the applications are not optimized. I can start any application on my Palm as fast as I can on my iPaq. The issue is optimization and overhead, I think, rather than what a person (or device) can actually get done.
Now, don't misunderstand. I don't dislike my iPaq, but when I carry both around, I have to stop and wonder which one really is the more useful device. If I need Word and Excel, I typically need full versions of them, so a notebook is more appropriate... My iPaq is fun, but my next handheld purchase will be a PalmOS device.
Maybe I'm missing something here. Does spam really work as an advertising method? When I get spam, I delete it. I've never purchased a product or service, directly or indirectly, because of spam. Are there people out there that really say, "Wow, I can get 50% off a pair of used socks! I'd better buy these right now!" ???
I know that sending spam is pretty low-cost for these companies, but if they're not seeing any return, it's still a bad investment. Are there any numbers of how effective spam really is? And if a Slashdotter has purchased something because of spam (not because of something you asked to receive), please post it. I'm anxious to hear stories about that.
Based on the comment you were replying to, there actually is ground for arguing that the student may be owed money. If the teacher was perceived as having agency for the school, the school could be responsible. Anyone who's had even the most basic law class can tell you that. Agency is a dangerous thing.
Following this line of thought, if the teacher was believed to speak for the school, and now the school is refusing to pay, there could be charges of promissory estoppel, which could lead to even more problems for the school.
I'm by no stretch a lawyer, but anyone who's ever taken an 8th grade law class, let alone anything more advanced, would have studied these things.
No, but on the other hand if you're "in public", there's a certain understanding that people will see you, and they may even talk to you or bump into you on the street. None of those things constitute criminal actions.
Talking or bumping into is one thing. Looking through your pockets to see what you're carrying is something else. If someone comes up and asks me what time it is, that's fine. If someone comes up and asks me what time it is, what kind of car I drive, where my house is, what type of locks I have on that house, how much money is in my wallet, and where my kids are... well, that's just a hair out of bounds. Not illegal, perhaps, but certainly rude. I see port scanning as the same thing.
Likewise, if you're hooked up to the public network, you can expect to sometimes get packets from other machines. If you don't like the
Getting some packets is one thing, but getting a thousand packets from one guy who's just trying to find information about my machine is (IMHO) something else.
There's a difference between attacking your machine, and just port scanning it.
Attacking isn't even a question -- I think we probably all agree that's deserved some punishment. I guess I just see a port scan as gathering intelligence about a target. In the real world, you hire a security guard to walk around your offices at night and make sure nothing's wrong (scanning your own network). But if some other guys walks in and starts checking stuff out (someone else scanning your network) you're going to be ticked.
The simple solution is just what you said -- run a firewall. I guess I'm just speaking for more of an idealist standpoint. In an ideal world, I wouldn't need a firewall. And I wouldn't need to lock the door to my house, either. So while we're going to have to live with port scanning, I just don't see it as something that should be acceptable for folks to do to me...
If some thug walks up to your front door and starts rattling the the knob, there's grounds for calling the authorities. You're exactly right, and there should be similar grounds for port scanning. To paraphrase the Code of Computer Use at my university, 'Authority to use a computer is granted solely by the owner of that computer. Just because you have a password doesn't give you the right to use it.' Port scanning uses resources on my computer (even if not significant). So in my mind, if somoene is using resources and I didn't tell them it was okay, something's wrong.
You're connected to everyone's socient. If you get tired of people trying to steal your car, I suggest you get rid of it. Because owning a car in everyone's society, this is just something you have to put up with.
I hate to be sarcastic, but come on. Just because you're using a public resource doesn't mean everyone else using that resource has the right to your stuff. If I'm driving down the highway, someone can't just get in my car.
I have cable, and I don't want to deal with 2 MB ads constantly. Living out in the middle of nowhere, we still get charged based on usage. Any time I'm forced to download something I didn't ask for (banner ads, pop-up windows, flashy animated gifs...), someone is charging me for the privilege of showing me ads. If these ads become larger and more invasive, you can bet the farm that it'll piss me off. I have zero interest in paying for someone else to show me their products.
Drive space won't be an issue, no. But bandwidth might be. When you download a song, you probably shoot for the fastest person that has what you're looking for. If BMG's giant file server has a tiny pipe, great, we can download this song, but at 348 bytes a second, I'm probably not going to...
I'm surprised that only one person has posted this information. I personally had no idea, but I figured there would be tons of post on this...
I come from a law enforcement family. As such, I talk to a lot of law enforcement officers. None of them I've talked to have thought gun control laws made any difference. To paraphrase one, "the people who can't buy a gun on a whim today aren't the same people who are shooting at me." So if the laws aren't doing any good, what's the point behind them?
Control. We fought the British and won. How would that fight have gone if no American had owned a gun? Our government is just trying to watch their backs. Keep folks from having guns, and they can't fight back when we roll into their town to violate their other rights.
Are we sure this is legit? Huge parts of this thing look too much like Win2000 for me to be convinced this isn't someone's idea of "good use of free time" and Gimp. Yeah, the "enhanced" parts look good, but against the backdrop that looks almost exactly like w2k... It's enough to send up a red flag in my book...
Not at all. These are just for families down on their luck waiting for things to take off. =)
>In any case, affirmative action is bordering on
>sexism.
Encourage a female, it's called progress. Encourage a male, it's called sexist.
I'm all about equality, but this isn't equality. They're actively recruiting female CS majors, rather than just CS majors. There will never be equality as long as people are pushing for their group (whatever sex or race that may be) to be placed above everyone else.
Evidently I'm sexist, because I refuse to acknowledge that I owe every "minority" something just because I'm a white male.
You're exactly right. They're assuming that everyone will "upgrade" to SDMI and mp3 will just disappear. Mp3 is out, and no matter what they do, they won't be able to kill it. Players are open source. Encoders are open source. If there's a way to kill either or both, I'd sure like to see it.
In the future, you'll have to buy your music in SDMI format? Fine. Someone'll buy it, record it as mp3, and post it right back on the 'net. End result? Nothing's changed.
I absolutely agree. Online ordering sure isn't that much more convenient. I can typically run down to my local book or software store and pick up what I need and have it the same day, rather than waiting a week or two to get it shipped to me. It's the money I save that makes me willing to wait. If I'm suddenly paying just as much to get it online, I'll just run to the local store and save myself the troulbe. Even if I'm only saving a couple of bucks, I'll still go local, because the "have it right now" factor is usually worth a couple of bucks.