There are two ways (generally) that you can become a Sys Admin for a company. The first takes for granted that you're looking for a company that knows what a Sys Admin does and actually has a separate IT department. The second way involves a company that has only just incorporated IT into their day-to-day business and is looking for Someone To Help With Computers (aka a Sys Admin).
The first scenario largely involves bigger companies and would most likely require an extensive (and diploma'd) knowledge of IT administration. The second scenario involves (usually) smaller outfits that are simply looking for an Alpha Geek with good credentials and a letter of reference from somewhere, not necessarily a seasoned vet or a college-trained guru.
It really depends on what kind of environment you're looking to start in.
Is the 'Linux' name important anymore?
on
Ask Alan Cox, Activist
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
This may sound like a rather facetious question, but in light of the latitude of development in Linux OS application (from mainstream, friendly GUI OS to embedded OS, to clustering), the recognition of just what is "Linux" may be harder and harder to define, at least in a way that doesn't confuse people who aren't knowledgable about it (or computer OS's in general).
The strengths of Linux are strengths very difficult to explain to people who don't see why Windows and Microsoft aren't good enough for everyone.
I suppose, ultimately, my question is this: has the development of Linux out-stretched it's ability to be well-defined to the general public, and if so, how can it be successfully marketed (which seems to be the competitive endgame these days)?
Regarding that review, the guy may have some salient points (XFS), but he goes about it like an absolutely elitist asshole. Half the time he doesn't explain what kind of errors he's experiencing, nor does he attempt to troubleshoot. Lastly, and most clearly, his level of professional journalism is revealed in his childish anti-Gnome rant which - to this - reader dropped any respect I had for his article down 10 places. Mandrake 8.2 is not the Grail, but to call it a f'ing disaster is just juvenile.
I don't have a problem with science. I don't have a problem with sprituality. Problem is that both have a parallel tendency to move towards fascism in cyclical patterns.
"Hello, ladies and gentlemen. We've now entered Low Earth Orbit, and our pilot, Roberto, is just adjusting the horizontal lift for your comfort. You may soon order drinks from the steward once the pilot has given the proper signal. Outside your window on your left you'll see the- OH MY GOD!! NOOOOOOO!"
You know, I was prepared to write a very articulate response to some of the negativity resulting from my original comment, but after reading the last few, the only thing I can think of is this: go fuck yourselves.
If you don't like/understand dissenting opinion, then you don't even understand what a revolution is in the first place.
oh come on
on
Revolution OS
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
What a bloated, shamelessly self-interested plug. No one outside of Linux-weenies and unwilling video archivists are going to see this film. Why? Because it's not interesting to anybody but the most devouted "me too" open-source enthusiast.
There must be some confusion (or delusion) about Linux and open-source these days: nobody outside of the "movement" is interested in Stallman (outside of his writing) or Torvalds (outside of his kernel work) or anyone else for that matter.
Why? Because it's bloody software we're talking about here! And although, granted, the philosophy behind the propogation of this software can be interesting, it's clearly not something anyone who isn't part of a LUG is going to be remotely interested in.
When Linux actually gains a reasonable hold of the desktop...when average citizens really take an interest in it (outside of civilian hobbyists), then you can make all the back-patting, iconoclastic documentaries you want.
Man, and I thought Jon Katz was a drip...
How's this for a letter...
on
e-Denounce
·
· Score: 1
Why on earth do you give an open mike to Jon Katz who, in his second article in as many weeks, hijacks the opinions of others - opinions better expressed than anything Katz could type - to suit his need to be known as An Important Internet Theorist.
He doesn't write, he regurgitates. His sense of self-importance, going so far as to eclipse the material of other authors he is depending on, is as evident as his posturing solemnity.
May I suggest directly linking the articles to the people being relied upon for their hard work? Parasitic journalism is not a trend I wish to see, particularly here.
If I take a patent out for a "large spherical 'star-island' inhabited with wondrous bacterial-like organisms on top of it's surface" would I then be within my right to own Earth?
Just think of all the Environmentalists I could sue!
Absolute rubbish. Just start calling it de facto shareware if, every time one of these companies goes tits up, you people are going to guilt-trip everyone who chose to believe that $0 price tag you guys were selling.
Firstly, flamebaiter, I don't work for Mandrake. Secondly, I'd rather be accused of guilting people into keeping companies like Mandrake going than being branded a self-righteous Ayn Rand zombie who'd rather see his world perverted than lift a finger to help anyone outside of his own interests.
The $0 price is an ambition. The fact is, it still exists and I imagine it will indefinitely. However, for those of us who *can* afford it, financial support is the only logical way to hedge Mandrake's survival.
I think anyone who's had a Mandrake system on their computer for more than two point-releases without paying for a box should join their Club or buy their boxed 8.2 when it's released.
It's as simple as that. Try it out free? Absolutely. Test-drives are good. But if you're not moving to anything else (even though you swear that "some day I'm going to try...") give back to Mandrake for turning their distro into something very distinctive.
It would be a crying shame for this company to fall down at this point in their growth, especially when so many of it's users never spend a cent to support them.
As a semi-seasoned Linux-user, I'm very impressed with what I've heard about SGL over the last few months. I'm not crazy about further confusing the already maxxed-out lexicon of terminology though ('grimoire' does sound cool, but would make me really feel like a geek after awhile...I'd be forced to read Tolkien and listen to more Rush).
I really hope the recent attention placed on SGL will attract some faithful maintainers/developers.
Remember: there's always room for a new distro, so long as it's good:)
I have no problem with extending Flash past it's current use as a simple component. As a proposed fully extensible web-authoring language, it has it's drawbacks (as does any other, to be fair).
My problem is that Flash is owned and (most importantly) guarded by Macromedia. Macromedia has done a lot in the last couple of years (like what AVID did to non-linear editing) to woo many a training college and consultant into thinking that Flash is synonymous with "anything that moves on a webpage", and that it is absolutely *vital* as a skill for web-page creation.
There's nothing wrong with that, insofar as they own it and can thus flaunt it to it's full extent. I worry though about the narrow-mindedness of school administrators and consulting agencies who will eat-up this latest offering as some sort of alechmic marvel and thus insist (by virtue of their influence) that it become a standard in lieu of a web-authoring language that is less hawkishly controlled and more collaboratively developed.
I'm getting pretty tired of the trend of Slashdot to post stories that are not only based on very shaky and highly-speculative evidence, but are backed-up by old articles that have since been refuted/proven dead-wrong.
It's one thing to accuse Microsoft of FUD, it's another to do their job for them by fragmenting the open-source/FSF/Linux community by posting this type of crap.
Quote: The suggestions are pretty extreme- [...] Personally I'd love to see it available digitally, but I still want a real hardcover copy, and I can't imagine hundreds of thousands of kids staying up late at night with laptops under their covers instead of the far more traditional book & flashlight
Then why are you posting it?
Hey, while you're at it: what if all babies born on October 14, 1967 were put to sleep and replaced by those Sony android dogs? IT'S POSSIBLE!
I don't want to wade into an endless debate about what art is, the medium vs. the message, etc..., however the one thing that bothers me in Katz's (unedited) article is the weight given to technology as opposed to the comparitively diminuitive role the word 'art' plays.
It's as if there is a desperation to associate any technology with art to the extent that art itself takes a backseat to whatever the latest mode of creation is.
I urge anyone impressed by this article to think about this. I urge anyone who forgets this article within five minutes to celebrate.
Slashdot Mirror
There are two ways (generally) that you can become a Sys Admin for a company. The first takes for granted that you're looking for a company that knows what a Sys Admin does and actually has a separate IT department. The second way involves a company that has only just incorporated IT into their day-to-day business and is looking for Someone To Help With Computers (aka a Sys Admin).
The first scenario largely involves bigger companies and would most likely require an extensive (and diploma'd) knowledge of IT administration. The second scenario involves (usually) smaller outfits that are simply looking for an Alpha Geek with good credentials and a letter of reference from somewhere, not necessarily a seasoned vet or a college-trained guru.
It really depends on what kind of environment you're looking to start in.
This may sound like a rather facetious question, but in light of the latitude of development in Linux OS application (from mainstream, friendly GUI OS to embedded OS, to clustering), the recognition of just what is "Linux" may be harder and harder to define, at least in a way that doesn't confuse people who aren't knowledgable about it (or computer OS's in general).
The strengths of Linux are strengths very difficult to explain to people who don't see why Windows and Microsoft aren't good enough for everyone.
I suppose, ultimately, my question is this: has the development of Linux out-stretched it's ability to be well-defined to the general public, and if so, how can it be successfully marketed (which seems to be the competitive endgame these days)?
Cheers.
...and when my man comes home from a tough day at the office, he wants Stove Top Stuffing. Stove Top; no other stuffing will do.
Regarding that review, the guy may have some salient points (XFS), but he goes about it like an absolutely elitist asshole. Half the time he doesn't explain what kind of errors he's experiencing, nor does he attempt to troubleshoot. Lastly, and most clearly, his level of professional journalism is revealed in his childish anti-Gnome rant which - to this - reader dropped any respect I had for his article down 10 places.
Mandrake 8.2 is not the Grail, but to call it a f'ing disaster is just juvenile.
If I could mod you up I would.
I don't have a problem with science. I don't have a problem with sprituality. Problem is that both have a parallel tendency to move towards fascism in cyclical patterns.
"Hello, ladies and gentlemen. We've now entered Low Earth Orbit, and our pilot, Roberto, is just adjusting the horizontal lift for your comfort. You may soon order drinks from the steward once the pilot has given the proper signal. Outside your window on your left you'll see the- OH MY GOD!! NOOOOOOO!"
realgone - I have to be honest: that was f*cking hilarious. If I could mod you up, I would.
You know, I was prepared to write a very articulate response to some of the negativity resulting from my original comment, but after reading the last few, the only thing I can think of is this: go fuck yourselves.
If you don't like/understand dissenting opinion, then you don't even understand what a revolution is in the first place.
What a bloated, shamelessly self-interested plug. No one outside of Linux-weenies and unwilling video archivists are going to see this film. Why? Because it's not interesting to anybody but the most devouted "me too" open-source enthusiast.
There must be some confusion (or delusion) about Linux and open-source these days: nobody outside of the "movement" is interested in Stallman (outside of his writing) or Torvalds (outside of his kernel work) or anyone else for that matter.
Why? Because it's bloody software we're talking about here! And although, granted, the philosophy behind the propogation of this software can be interesting, it's clearly not something anyone who isn't part of a LUG is going to be remotely interested in.
When Linux actually gains a reasonable hold of the desktop...when average citizens really take an interest in it (outside of civilian hobbyists), then you can make all the back-patting, iconoclastic documentaries you want.
Man, and I thought Jon Katz was a drip...
Instead of an F, try a P for Puritanism.
He's got at least one idea to start with (below), but what must-have skills or demonstrations would you add?
Flash cards.
Why on earth do you give an open mike to Jon Katz who, in his second article in as many weeks, hijacks the opinions of others - opinions better expressed than anything Katz could type - to suit his need to be known as An Important Internet Theorist.
He doesn't write, he regurgitates. His sense of self-importance, going so far as to eclipse the material of other authors he is depending on, is as evident as his posturing solemnity.
May I suggest directly linking the articles to the people being relied upon for their hard work? Parasitic journalism is not a trend I wish to see, particularly here.
If I take a patent out for a "large spherical 'star-island' inhabited with wondrous bacterial-like organisms on top of it's surface" would I then be within my right to own Earth?
Just think of all the Environmentalists I could sue!
Absolute rubbish. Just start calling it de facto shareware if, every time one of these companies goes tits up, you people are going to guilt-trip everyone who chose to believe that $0 price tag you guys were selling.
Firstly, flamebaiter, I don't work for Mandrake. Secondly, I'd rather be accused of guilting people into keeping companies like Mandrake going than being branded a self-righteous Ayn Rand zombie who'd rather see his world perverted than lift a finger to help anyone outside of his own interests.
The $0 price is an ambition. The fact is, it still exists and I imagine it will indefinitely. However, for those of us who *can* afford it, financial support is the only logical way to hedge Mandrake's survival.
I think anyone who's had a Mandrake system on their computer for more than two point-releases without paying for a box should join their Club or buy their boxed 8.2 when it's released.
...") give back to Mandrake for turning their distro into something very distinctive.
It's as simple as that. Try it out free? Absolutely. Test-drives are good. But if you're not moving to anything else (even though you swear that "some day I'm going to try
It would be a crying shame for this company to fall down at this point in their growth, especially when so many of it's users never spend a cent to support them.
As a semi-seasoned Linux-user, I'm very impressed with what I've heard about SGL over the last few months. I'm not crazy about further confusing the already maxxed-out lexicon of terminology though ('grimoire' does sound cool, but would make me really feel like a geek after awhile...I'd be forced to read Tolkien and listen to more Rush).
I really hope the recent attention placed on SGL will attract some faithful maintainers/developers.
Remember: there's always room for a new distro, so long as it's good
It's "alchemic", not "alechmic" which in itself poses a fascinating discussizn.
I have no problem with extending Flash past it's current use as a simple component. As a proposed fully extensible web-authoring language, it has it's drawbacks (as does any other, to be fair).
My problem is that Flash is owned and (most importantly) guarded by Macromedia. Macromedia has done a lot in the last couple of years (like what AVID did to non-linear editing) to woo many a training college and consultant into thinking that Flash is synonymous with "anything that moves on a webpage", and that it is absolutely *vital* as a skill for web-page creation.
There's nothing wrong with that, insofar as they own it and can thus flaunt it to it's full extent. I worry though about the narrow-mindedness of school administrators and consulting agencies who will eat-up this latest offering as some sort of alechmic marvel and thus insist (by virtue of their influence) that it become a standard in lieu of a web-authoring language that is less hawkishly controlled and more collaboratively developed.
[My 2 cents at least]
The first 500 San Franciscans (sounds like a monastary, doesn't it?) that move to Canada will recieve no less than 3 Vancouver Grizzlies shirts!
Not enough?
Sweat too much? Hot and itchy? Move to Newfoundland (the beautiful location of The Shipping News) and say good-bye to that "dry heat" forever!
Immigrants from SF will be greeted at the airport by Rush (or Gordon Lightfoot).
I wish there was such a thing as Open Source Hardware.
Dad, leave me alone!
I'm getting pretty tired of the trend of Slashdot to post stories that are not only based on very shaky and highly-speculative evidence, but are backed-up by old articles that have since been refuted/proven dead-wrong.
It's one thing to accuse Microsoft of FUD, it's another to do their job for them by fragmenting the open-source/FSF/Linux community by posting this type of crap.
I'd wish Lucas would forget about the screens and focus more on the script.
Ooooh, trade embargo! How exciting!
Quote: The suggestions are pretty extreme- [...] Personally I'd love to see it available digitally, but I still want a real hardcover copy, and I can't imagine hundreds of thousands of kids staying up late at night with laptops under their covers instead of the far more traditional book & flashlight
Then why are you posting it?
Hey, while you're at it: what if all babies born on October 14, 1967 were put to sleep and replaced by those Sony android dogs? IT'S POSSIBLE!
Jeez.
I don't want to wade into an endless debate about what art is, the medium vs. the message, etc..., however the one thing that bothers me in Katz's (unedited) article is the weight given to technology as opposed to the comparitively diminuitive role the word 'art' plays.
It's as if there is a desperation to associate any technology with art to the extent that art itself takes a backseat to whatever the latest mode of creation is.
I urge anyone impressed by this article to think about this. I urge anyone who forgets this article within five minutes to celebrate.
Lastly, it's 'DaVinci', not 'DaVince'.