It took me 3 attempts to pass that exam and now there are 5 year olds who can pass it?
This reminds me of a line from the song New Math by Tom Lehrer:
Hooray for New Math,
New-hoo-hoo Math,
It won't do you a bit of good to review math.
It's so simple,
So very simple,
That only a child can do it!
For those of you who are too young to have experienced New Math, Professor Lehrer introduces it by saying, "Some of you who have small children may have perhaps been put in the embarrassing position of being unable to do your child's arithmetic homework because of the current revolution in mathematics teaching known as the New Math....In the new approach, as you know, the important thing is to understand what you're doing, rather than to get the right answer."
Right. To be specific, Battlestar Galactica was very badly written, whereas Star Trek was well written. If each episode of Galactica really "cost 'well over' $1 million", that illustrates the problem. Good writing, meaning good stories and good characters, isn't easy to do, but it doesn't cost much.
When the original Galactica came on, I was already a Star Trek fan, so it seemed like a very good thing. But try as I might, I just couldn't like it. The stories weren't interesting, the characters were shallow, and it wasn't even well cast - it's hard to relate to Lorne Green as a sci-fi patriarch after having run been a cowboy patriarch in Bonanza.
Knowing what I know now, it seems as if they were trying to compensate for a lack of writing with a lot of flash. No wonder it cost too much to support the hopeful, though ultimately disappointed, audience that it drew.
My experience has been that the biggest factor in how my boss affects my happiness is the boss's people skills. After that, there's resource management, and technical competance probably comes about third. Let's look at these individually:
People skills: Obviously, somebody who doesn't manage people well shouldn't be a boss. This sometimes gets overlooked during promotion, when they promote someone who is technically smart (or else just a good politician) but who lacks people skills. It's always a disaster. A primary part of being a good boss is making people feel respected and valued. Many technical geniuses simply don't think that way.
Resource management: This has to do with boring stuff like schedules, budgets, equipment, etc. Aside from being treated badly personally, few things can make technical people unhappier than having an unrealistic schedule and not being given what they need to do the job.
Technical skills: It can be very bad to have a technical boss who doesn't understand technical stuff. In my experience, the best bosses have been people who were good - but not necessarily great - at the technical stuff. If they're completely incompetent, that's a red flag for the Dilbert Principle. Conversely, someone who is a technical genius is probably happier doing what they're best at: being a technical genius. The very worst case is someone who isn't very good and knows that (as everybody else does), and is insecure about it. That's real trouble. I once left a job precisely because of one such boss.
With those categories covered, everything else is round-off error.
My question... does this represent Gnu thinking on the part of Groupon?
It's quite possible. Whatever else you may say about Groupon, it's undeniable that Groupon's Not Unix. In fact, it's likely that Groupon's Not Useful. Especially if their servers run the Hurd.
November 10, 2034. Twenty years after "Dumb and Dumber To", geriatric comedians Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels reprise their iconic roles from 2014 in "Dumb and Dumber 4". This third installment of the "Dumb and Dumber" franchise brings an interesting sci-fi twist to an otherwise tired premise. The boys stumble (or should we say "toddle"?) into a certain Professor Peabody's lab, and their brains accidentally get infected with an algae virus that Peabody and his pal Sherman have been cooking up, making our heroes - can you believe it? - even dumber. Not even Peabody himself can save the boys from the madcap misadventures that ensue! To heighten the movie experience, select theaters will offer an algae sprinkle free with each purchase of popcorn. Fun for the whole family!
Maybe Zuckerberg's hinting that he's gonna buy Netflix. It would be a bargain compared to some of the other acquisitions he made. Then again, it has old-fashioned acquisition/merger stuff like profits and assets. So, on that basis, it's probably of no real interest to him. Never mind.
Yes, I noticed a marked improvement in the quality of articles around 2012.
I had always thought that my many small edits to add a link, or maybe fix a sentence or two, never really amounted to much: just tiny ripples in the giant Wikipedian ocean. But if they had such an effect on quality, even if (sadly) deleterious, that such a lofty personage as yourself would actually notice my absence...well, Sir, I can only say: you make me blush!
Perhaps it was my contribution years ago to the Direct-sequence spread spectrum article that most offended you. As I recall, the article was in its formative stage when I chanced upon it, and having had some small experience in that field, I felt at liberty to significantly expand it. Please accept my apologies.
Newcomers are always to be welcomed. There must be no cabal, there must be no elites, there must be no hierarchy or structure which gets in the way of this openness to newcomers.
Personally, I lost interest in contributing to it a few years ago when the sort of constructive, well intended stuff I had always contributed began to get reverted on a regular basis. I still contribute occasionally, but only things that are still unlikely to be reverted, that is, minor cleanups of articles that nobody (else) reads.
"Can a combination of legal action, market pressure, and societal taboo work together to curb harassment?"
Evidently, all systems of moderation and meta-moderation by users have proven ineffective. But the frequent scoldings we see here evidently show promise.
Slashdot Mirror
Corollary: Base sixteen is just like base ten...if you've got four extra fingers.
You may be onto something. To be fair, maybe it was simply aimed at a younger audience than Star Trek.
It took me 3 attempts to pass that exam and now there are 5 year olds who can pass it?
This reminds me of a line from the song New Math by Tom Lehrer:
Hooray for New Math,
New-hoo-hoo Math,
It won't do you a bit of good to review math.
It's so simple,
So very simple,
That only a child can do it!
For those of you who are too young to have experienced New Math, Professor Lehrer introduces it by saying, "Some of you who have small children may have perhaps been put in the embarrassing position of being unable to do your child's arithmetic homework because of the current revolution in mathematics teaching known as the New Math....In the new approach, as you know, the important thing is to understand what you're doing, rather than to get the right answer."
Right. To be specific, Battlestar Galactica was very badly written, whereas Star Trek was well written. If each episode of Galactica really "cost 'well over' $1 million", that illustrates the problem. Good writing, meaning good stories and good characters, isn't easy to do, but it doesn't cost much.
When the original Galactica came on, I was already a Star Trek fan, so it seemed like a very good thing. But try as I might, I just couldn't like it. The stories weren't interesting, the characters were shallow, and it wasn't even well cast - it's hard to relate to Lorne Green as a sci-fi patriarch after having run been a cowboy patriarch in Bonanza.
Knowing what I know now, it seems as if they were trying to compensate for a lack of writing with a lot of flash. No wonder it cost too much to support the hopeful, though ultimately disappointed, audience that it drew.
My experience has been that the biggest factor in how my boss affects my happiness is the boss's people skills. After that, there's resource management, and technical competance probably comes about third. Let's look at these individually:
People skills: Obviously, somebody who doesn't manage people well shouldn't be a boss. This sometimes gets overlooked during promotion, when they promote someone who is technically smart (or else just a good politician) but who lacks people skills. It's always a disaster. A primary part of being a good boss is making people feel respected and valued. Many technical geniuses simply don't think that way.
Resource management: This has to do with boring stuff like schedules, budgets, equipment, etc. Aside from being treated badly personally, few things can make technical people unhappier than having an unrealistic schedule and not being given what they need to do the job.
Technical skills: It can be very bad to have a technical boss who doesn't understand technical stuff. In my experience, the best bosses have been people who were good - but not necessarily great - at the technical stuff. If they're completely incompetent, that's a red flag for the Dilbert Principle. Conversely, someone who is a technical genius is probably happier doing what they're best at: being a technical genius. The very worst case is someone who isn't very good and knows that (as everybody else does), and is insecure about it. That's real trouble. I once left a job precisely because of one such boss.
With those categories covered, everything else is round-off error.
But at that point, we risk pulling the comet out of its orbit due to Kim Kardashian's massive ass.
Good one, made me chuckle. Kindda reminds me of Gravitina from the old Buzz Lightyear cartoon. Except she was massive on the other end.
"Unanchored But Stable — And Sending Back Images"? Let's call the next comet probe "Kim Kardashian". Then again, Philae is stable.
You fail to overlook the crucial point.
- Samuel Goldwyn
"Don't let yesterday use up too much of today." - Will Rogers
My question... does this represent Gnu thinking on the part of Groupon?
It's quite possible. Whatever else you may say about Groupon, it's undeniable that Groupon's Not Unix. In fact, it's likely that Groupon's Not Useful. Especially if their servers run the Hurd.
Next thing, you're gonna tell me that Microsoft misspelled Windows 10...
November 10, 2034. Twenty years after "Dumb and Dumber To", geriatric comedians Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels reprise their iconic roles from 2014 in "Dumb and Dumber 4". This third installment of the "Dumb and Dumber" franchise brings an interesting sci-fi twist to an otherwise tired premise. The boys stumble (or should we say "toddle"?) into a certain Professor Peabody's lab, and their brains accidentally get infected with an algae virus that Peabody and his pal Sherman have been cooking up, making our heroes - can you believe it? - even dumber. Not even Peabody himself can save the boys from the madcap misadventures that ensue! To heighten the movie experience, select theaters will offer an algae sprinkle free with each purchase of popcorn. Fun for the whole family!
Maybe Zuckerberg's hinting that he's gonna buy Netflix. It would be a bargain compared to some of the other acquisitions he made. Then again, it has old-fashioned acquisition/merger stuff like profits and assets. So, on that basis, it's probably of no real interest to him. Never mind.
Yes, I noticed a marked improvement in the quality of articles around 2012.
I had always thought that my many small edits to add a link, or maybe fix a sentence or two, never really amounted to much: just tiny ripples in the giant Wikipedian ocean. But if they had such an effect on quality, even if (sadly) deleterious, that such a lofty personage as yourself would actually notice my absence...well, Sir, I can only say: you make me blush!
Perhaps it was my contribution years ago to the Direct-sequence spread spectrum article that most offended you. As I recall, the article was in its formative stage when I chanced upon it, and having had some small experience in that field, I felt at liberty to significantly expand it. Please accept my apologies.
From Wikipedia's Statement of Principles:
Newcomers are always to be welcomed. There must be no cabal, there must be no elites, there must be no hierarchy or structure which gets in the way of this openness to newcomers.
Personally, I lost interest in contributing to it a few years ago when the sort of constructive, well intended stuff I had always contributed began to get reverted on a regular basis. I still contribute occasionally, but only things that are still unlikely to be reverted, that is, minor cleanups of articles that nobody (else) reads.
Sorry...I just realized that 'butter' should have become 'strontium'. (Still, is strontium really funnier than butter?)
`Two femtoseconds wrong!' sighed the Hatter. `I told you butter wouldn't suit the works!' he added looking angrily at the March Hare.
`It was the best butter,' the March Hare meekly replied.
I sure hope it isn't your wicked Uncle Ernie...
His will was drafted by Dewey, Cheatem, and Howe.
(RIP, Tom.)
No, this is about a valve amplifier, not a hoover amplifier.
(which reminds me: Happy Guy Fawkes Day in advance to our British friends here)
My view is that it is a fantasy to assume that if you create a powerful being, then it will treat you morally.
OK, then how do you explain Vladimir Putin?*
*note to moderators: it's just a joke
"Can a combination of legal action, market pressure, and societal taboo work together to curb harassment?"
Evidently, all systems of moderation and meta-moderation by users have proven ineffective. But the frequent scoldings we see here evidently show promise.
Instead of "Add or Remove Programs" or "Programs and Features", I recommend they call that "Remove or Add Features and Programs".
I dunno...it darn sure didn't work on my kids...
"Silly Fungi - Trix are for kids!"