The thing about Shakespeare is that, in order to "get it" you really need to be well versed in the culture of the time - or, at least, the cultural references in the plays - and the nuanced jokes throughout it. In other words, you've got to have the jokes explained to you.
People who say Shakespeare was a good writer and that bladabla - WHATEVER - are full of crap. Sure, he was a good, and significantly better than average writer. Even a revolutionary writer, as he is arguably the inventor of the sitcom. But that's about it.
His writing certainly has no merit in a high school classroom, particularly with the literacy levels of kids these days. Want to turn a teenager off to reading? Don't give him engaging reading material, but make him read Shakespeare.
Wow. You guys (the editors and posters) got taken for a huge ride. This is absolute drivel - it makes no sense whatsoever and is almost incoherrent. American and French Revolution? At the surface it made sense, but how he continued to do so did not in the least bit.
Skip it if you haven't already; it's not worth your time.
"could" get out of the hw business? Apple cut its teeth on hardware AND software, and they've innovated since in both areas (to varying degrees throughout the past 30ish years). Maybe not at the same time, and the 1990s DID seem to be a time of general stagnation for them (from my perspective), but wasn't that the time when Steve Jobs was "gone"? Seems the man is good for the company's productivity and, in general, bottom line. I can't think of a time since around 1999 when Apple hasn't had a product or three that has been wildly popular - whether it was the original iBook, the iPod, iPod mini, iMac, and various other descendants. All popular in all likelyhood due to the hardware, (and of course, marketing). Maybe not always hte first to come ot market with a technology or idea, but they seem competent in taking hardware ideas and consistently making them functional and profitable before anyone else (USB, Firewire, iPod/portable MP3 player, desktop Unix, GUI, the mouse, the internet (iirc they had quite a lot of sales early mid 90s due to the internet), user-friendly hw design... sure there are more).
And no, I don't own a mac and don't intend to. I personally hate the designer mentality of them these days,
Oh, I know the ATF is full of shit. They're a beaurocratic, politicized nightmare - a nanny organization if there ever were one. But I also think its irresponsible to store solid rocket fuel in close proximity to other potentially causic, flamable, etc. materials.
While it's not terribly dangerous on its own, people keep other things in their house which can and will react with other substances. That kind of behavior shouldn't be allowed. (For the most part, I'd think - say - storing it in an ammunition locker or crate would be sufficient in keeping it segregated.)
For the quantities spoken of here, though, I don't think it's much of an issue.
I no longer expect the news that I read to be accurate in any way, nor do I expect that people who give me the news to care that they are not accurate.
That's not just China, buddy. That's a pretty prevailant thing worldwide these days. If not necessarily false all the time, just useless sensationalism or heavily partisian.
If Linux and/or BSD benefit, it's solely as a side-effect to the further adoption of Apple/OSX machines. Apple was well aware of MS's foolish maneuvering in this department re: WGA, and counter-maneuvered to feed the market where MS will fail.
Linux, I suspect, will mainly be employed as a sever network component - Samba, databases, directory services and what have you, all of which work much better with OSX than with Windows anyway.
It wouldn't be an issue, if there wasn't a legitimate concern of danger. Now, if your neighbor is a quarter mile away, it's another matter, but generally speaking, in an urban or suburban environment, storing anything that flash-burns or explodes due to minor mishap, or has a high likelyhood of doing so without the direct intervnetion of a person (ie heat, old shed w/ wiring problems, etc.) shouldn't be allowed due to the financial and personal danger it poses to the assets of others. You might have all the insurance, etc. in the world covering just such a possibility, but it can not save the life of a family member who just happens to be out in the garden and gets hit with shrapenel from an explosion, or the destruction of something with personal sentimental value. The only reason you'd get such insurance is "just in case", not as a loss prevention measure (ie from being sued to solvency) in the eventuality that shit happens.
What's more, it's the responsible thing to, say, not have a 35 gallon metal gasoline tank and a couple bags of fertilizer in your shed out back in, say, Texas or Florida, or somewhere else where the heat might be an issue. Or storing large quantities of black powder or smokeless powder in an apartment of firewall-less condo. Unfortunately, most people are not responsible these days of themselves, let alone for the concerns of safety their neighbors might have. That's why we need regulation in this regard.
I don't particularly like it, and I think pretty much anything involving the ATF is complete bullshit, and basically a group of jackboots formed to provide prohibitionist thugs a job after there was no more prohibition. (How many times have you heard of an 'assault rifle' being used in a crime? once, twice? its a statistically insignificant percentage, even amongst the body of firearm crimes as a whole.)
Yep, that's the best policy if you're looking for a 'generic' resume, which fits the bill for most scenarios. A good job to fit your skills, however, should require a targetted resume.
In general, though, a CV is essentially a big business card.
Leave off references. They might keep your resume on file (depending on how many applicants they get, etc.) and more often than not seem to not check references in my experience. Maintain your reference list seperately, so that if they really want to check them, they can - and not all companies even ask for referneces when hiring. Just denote that references are available upon personal request.
This section just has the schooling and special certs I've got, with the dates of accomplishment and any other pertinent information (GPA, magna cum laude, etc), in table form.
Experience
This is a list of past/current employers and the dates of employment/contract, listed with what the job entailed. If you've got a lot, just list the most significant ones and note that you've done so to give a better picture of your overall experience (letting them know that additional information will be made available upon request).
Skills
Conceise, organized groups of technology skills - basically, buzz words. I add and remove skills as they become outdated/ill-used, and taylor the list for each application. Again, note there are other minor skills not included for breivity's sake - they don't care if you're able to configure and set up apache or what have you if you're being hired for a development position, but they'll probably be interested in experience in kernel development or apache module creation. Make it buzz-word compliant.
Interests
Build stock cars for a hobby? Involved in a competitive sport? Published a book? List them very briefly. Demonstrate cross-competency and personality - useless for screening, but if you get past the entry HR shmuck to a real interview, then chances are it'll be more personally beneficial than not having it. They can tell in synopsis that you're not just a coder/administrator/whatever and are knowledgeable outside your realm of expertise. Obviously it'll be more useful for certain types of jobs than others, so use discretion.
I try and keep it to a single page with multiple columns per section, with a right-face section header, and a 10pt font.... of course, as this works for me, I'm probably shooting myself in the foot by giving advice on the matter to duplicate it.:P
I'm late here, but consider the culture, weather, and locally available attractions in your decision. I've not worked for either, so I can't say, just something I always take into consideration. I imagine that, at the very least, you'd have a shot to work at the company you do not pick later down the line. Using that mentality, I would probably pick google first, as even though Google is getting big, Microsoft is bigger and has a lot more staying power and money.
For me, "free food" appeals a great deal, as it's one of those little irritating things which bothers me throughout the day. You'd not have to cook, go shopping (much), or do much premeditation about what to eat. For me - someone who eats 4 large meals a day due to a high metabolism and does not particularly care for the act of eating in the first place (ie no "food fetish" like some people), this is a big plus. Single? Usually eat microwave pizzas? You'll end up saving thousands by working at google simply due to the food, as if you don't have free food, you'll probably end up eating out a lot more often, I imagine. That's a financial side of things you might want to keep in mind.
Another thing in Google's favor is that they, as far as I know, have a lot more campuses across the country, so you would have more opportunity for changing your location on a whim than with Microsoft. Who knows, you might not like the yuppie culture of Seattle (I know I sure as hell wouldn't). Culturally, Google seems to have a lot more diverse people - at least geographically. I imagine the geographical seperation of campuses even assists in the comapny being as diverse as possible.
If you've got an offer on the table already, be honest with both of them. Tell them you've got an offer from MS/Google, and would like to see what they would have you doing specifically, and would at least like to try and get a taste of the company culture before you make your decision. If they want you bad enough at the rate they're likely to pay you, chances are they'd fly you out - provided you've not already been out there.
From an outsider's view, Microsoft has little to offer that Google wouldn't also have. From where I'msitting, MS has a very tight-laced image - one of authoritarian worldview enforcement (at least as it pertains to software culture).
I would be interested in your response, just to know I didn't waste my time thinking about htis.:)
How much sense does that make, re: Saddam? Think about it - if you, as a kid, had your parents take all your porn magazines from you, and you didn't have any left, would you say to your friends, "Yeah man, my mom sucks, but I managed to secret a couple away! Hah, I'll show her!" ? No, I don't think so.
Could it be that it wasn't your career, but your obsession with computing and lack of life balance that did it?
I mean, it's not like a career in IT AND working on a post-graduate degree at the same time, while trying to maintain a marriage and raise a kid is what one would term a "low key schedule". In such a situation, if your career is doing well/better than average and your schooling is going well, you ARE neglecting family members. Two years of multiple day/evening classes, plus course work and papers, on top of 40+ hours a week makes it difficult to get out and get drunk once a week with buddies if you're single or uncommitted. A kid and a wife? Just asking for trouble.
If you're going to school and working full time, and your wife isn't, then I suspect you mis-paired yourselves anyway - she should've been doing something to help alieviate your work burden so you could better pay attention to her and your schooling, and in general be an emotionally healthier person.
FWIW, married, 2 kids (well, 1, but the 2nd is due this week), just finishing up my bachelors in IT, and here-and-there work to make ends meet. I could not maintain a "career" in IT at this point without going insane from lack of "me time" (or "sleep time"); if I were single and childless, it would be another story. Relationships and raising children take effort, but MOST IMPORTANTLY time, to not end up with a broken product.
Well, if that something you love to do is to fuck, I can't really think of a better thing to get paid for (provided it's somewhere in California and there's a camera present, of course). And then you could really say, "I love my work."
Oh, I don't doubt in the least bit that they will.
However, at least from where I sit, I don't think it'll matter much at all. I very well may be the exception, but I don't keep.url files sitting around - I don't even use them. And I rarely open something with a "web browser" defaulting extension otherwise - I just click the firefox icon and away I go.
In fact, I recently found out that somehow IE was made my default browser. I don't use IE, at all, so I'm not sure it happened, but I can only imagine how long it had been the case before I noticed it.
Unless firefox drastically decreases it's memory use (or simply more effective management, so it doesn't interfere with user behavior), or at the very least keeps it fairly constant from a current release, I can't imagine Firefox 2.0 being much of an improvement, to be honest. That's got to be the biggest gripe about it (and only then at about 40 or so tabs). I've not compared it to IE, however, and I can't imagine MS would release a product of superior quality in regard to memory use, so...
Other than that, I've not had a single problem with firefox in months, even in Windows. Every couple months I'll encounter a shoddy page with horrid gobs of javascript (myspace profiles, I'm looking at you), which is the only thing which has caused a fuck-up since I-can't-remember-when.
Hmm, this is just conjecture, but I would suppose from the information provided that this indicates more people are getting rid of, or more accurately replacing, their aging Windows machines with Macs.
I also suppose part of it has to do with the upcoming licensing scheme of Vista, as more companies attempt to phase out Windows in favor of "something else" - whatever that something is, provided it gets the job done and doesn't have the intrusive licensing schemes of Vista and all future MS products.
BTW, don't play into this manipulative troll - you're letting him define the debate. He's calling the death penalty "murder". This assumes that there is no authority in such matters, none whatsoever, as it puts the state on equal moral footing as the murder. Additionally, it removes the concepts of responsibility, natural consequences, and justice. A murderer is someone who, unjustly, takes the life of another person with intent. It is just for that person to suffer the same fate as the person he denied life from, and not only is it the murderer's natural consequence to die, it is the responsibility of the society to make it so that it discourages a repeat scenario.
Why are we (as a society) so afraid of words and their potential impact? Are we so imature, violent and framented that speech alone will destroy the cohesion of our societey?
Unfortunately, yes. We have allowed - nay, encouraged - for the last 40 years the expansion of "diversity" in our country. When you emphasize the different and contrary amongst people groups, to the loss of past cultural traditions, you are causing division of unity - precisely what "diversity" means, really. It's the end goal - destroy the usefulness of language for communication of difficult ideas, and it will be easier to control the language. In the US, both the Democrats (through "politically correct" speech and double standards) and the Republicans under Bush have employed these tactics.
And what is the distinction that makes the clarification of "subject" vs. "citizen" corporeal?
A citizen has the right to go about doing what he wants, uninhibited provided he does not imbibe the rights of another or cause harm. A subject has none.
America is seen as a strange, nutty, violent backwater by the rest of the world. Maybe in time you will come to appreciate the same checks and balances that we have.
It is funnnny what some people will believe if they're told it enough.
Apparently you've not been paying much attention for the last, oh, 20 or 30 years - the time it's been since what you're saying was even remotely true. This might come as a surprise to you, but US crime rates - namely, the violent ones - are at an all-time historic low. Meanwhile, Britian's crime rates, particularly the violent ones, are increasing.
Yes, the UK's firearm crime is increasing, and our's is decreasing - this, despite the fact that we've got the legal freedom to carry a weapon (gun, sword - whatever you can fit in your pants, basically) concealed in the vast majority of the states, with only states like California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and specifically cities like NYC, Washington DC, Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Francisco completely banning guns. Ironically, they've also got the highest crime rates in the country, and drastically skewer the average upwards.
While this might be a surprise to you, it is "safe" in the majority of America for attractive white women to go out and walk around neighborhoods, after dark. It's safe to leave your car and house unlocked - you are very unlikely to be burglarized, and there are very few people who ever are. Home invasions are nowhere near as common.
Furthermore, Britian has more a problem right now with Muslim ghetto contention than the US does with Mexican illegals - and the US is getting some 11 million Mexicans each year, courtesy-free from our southern border.
As far as the race thing is concerned, I don't think I have an issue with it so much, per se. However, the potential for abuse is there, most certainly, and just because it's being applied justly (IMO) in this situation does not mean that it will not be used for political means in the future to silence an opponent who is expressing un-PC views about, say, the Muslims. I don't know about over there, but over here I've seen pretty much anything and everything said by a white person that is negative about anyone else to be racist (or, for that matter, anyone lower on the PC scale of race baiting*), whereas black people can get away with pretty much anything they want. For instance, a black person calling me "whitey", "whitebread", "crackah", "vanilla" or anything like that? Perfectly acceptable, as it's considered "street slang" by the courts, even if it's mixed in with other derisive speech. If I say one thing to someone of another color along those lines, I am fucked, either financially due ot a lawsuit or due to obscure racism laws.
* white asian mexican black, or something like that. something similar follows for belief systems - catholic christian buddhist muslim athiest
I might be wrong in this, but as far as I know, the craft are made from metal. Metal, properly smelted and what have you, does not weaken with age unless coroded or put under significant stress.
Granted, it could simply be that the vibrations of re-entry have weakened the metals at the molecular level, but that should only impact operational strength not tolerance to such injuries.
How about ceramics and/or ballistic plates? I know they're heavy, so it's probably not viable - and I really don't know what's currently being used. But unless the object had a velocity over, say, 3000fps and wasn't heavy metal, it'd probably be stopped by such materials. They work well enough for body armor.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing about Shakespeare is that, in order to "get it" you really need to be well versed in the culture of the time - or, at least, the cultural references in the plays - and the nuanced jokes throughout it. In other words, you've got to have the jokes explained to you.
People who say Shakespeare was a good writer and that bladabla - WHATEVER - are full of crap. Sure, he was a good, and significantly better than average writer. Even a revolutionary writer, as he is arguably the inventor of the sitcom. But that's about it.
His writing certainly has no merit in a high school classroom, particularly with the literacy levels of kids these days. Want to turn a teenager off to reading? Don't give him engaging reading material, but make him read Shakespeare.
Wow. You guys (the editors and posters) got taken for a huge ride. This is absolute drivel - it makes no sense whatsoever and is almost incoherrent. American and French Revolution? At the surface it made sense, but how he continued to do so did not in the least bit.
Skip it if you haven't already; it's not worth your time.
My ass is post-modern; it transcends obsolecense.
Shak-who? I imagine 50% of the population under 25 doesn't even remember why Shakespeare is significant.
And 49% don't think his work is relevant or even anything special - just boring romance novel/chic flick type pulp.
"could" get out of the hw business? Apple cut its teeth on hardware AND software, and they've innovated since in both areas (to varying degrees throughout the past 30ish years). Maybe not at the same time, and the 1990s DID seem to be a time of general stagnation for them (from my perspective), but wasn't that the time when Steve Jobs was "gone"? Seems the man is good for the company's productivity and, in general, bottom line. I can't think of a time since around 1999 when Apple hasn't had a product or three that has been wildly popular - whether it was the original iBook, the iPod, iPod mini, iMac, and various other descendants. All popular in all likelyhood due to the hardware, (and of course, marketing). Maybe not always hte first to come ot market with a technology or idea, but they seem competent in taking hardware ideas and consistently making them functional and profitable before anyone else (USB, Firewire, iPod/portable MP3 player, desktop Unix, GUI, the mouse, the internet (iirc they had quite a lot of sales early mid 90s due to the internet), user-friendly hw design... sure there are more).
And no, I don't own a mac and don't intend to. I personally hate the designer mentality of them these days,
Oh, I know the ATF is full of shit. They're a beaurocratic, politicized nightmare - a nanny organization if there ever were one. But I also think its irresponsible to store solid rocket fuel in close proximity to other potentially causic, flamable, etc. materials.
While it's not terribly dangerous on its own, people keep other things in their house which can and will react with other substances. That kind of behavior shouldn't be allowed. (For the most part, I'd think - say - storing it in an ammunition locker or crate would be sufficient in keeping it segregated.)
For the quantities spoken of here, though, I don't think it's much of an issue.
I no longer expect the news that I read to be accurate in any way, nor do I expect that people who give me the news to care that they are not accurate.
That's not just China, buddy. That's a pretty prevailant thing worldwide these days. If not necessarily false all the time, just useless sensationalism or heavily partisian.
People here (in the US) aren't skeptical enough.
If Linux and/or BSD benefit, it's solely as a side-effect to the further adoption of Apple/OSX machines. Apple was well aware of MS's foolish maneuvering in this department re: WGA, and counter-maneuvered to feed the market where MS will fail.
Linux, I suspect, will mainly be employed as a sever network component - Samba, databases, directory services and what have you, all of which work much better with OSX than with Windows anyway.
It wouldn't be an issue, if there wasn't a legitimate concern of danger. Now, if your neighbor is a quarter mile away, it's another matter, but generally speaking, in an urban or suburban environment, storing anything that flash-burns or explodes due to minor mishap, or has a high likelyhood of doing so without the direct intervnetion of a person (ie heat, old shed w/ wiring problems, etc.) shouldn't be allowed due to the financial and personal danger it poses to the assets of others. You might have all the insurance, etc. in the world covering just such a possibility, but it can not save the life of a family member who just happens to be out in the garden and gets hit with shrapenel from an explosion, or the destruction of something with personal sentimental value. The only reason you'd get such insurance is "just in case", not as a loss prevention measure (ie from being sued to solvency) in the eventuality that shit happens.
What's more, it's the responsible thing to, say, not have a 35 gallon metal gasoline tank and a couple bags of fertilizer in your shed out back in, say, Texas or Florida, or somewhere else where the heat might be an issue. Or storing large quantities of black powder or smokeless powder in an apartment of firewall-less condo. Unfortunately, most people are not responsible these days of themselves, let alone for the concerns of safety their neighbors might have. That's why we need regulation in this regard.
I don't particularly like it, and I think pretty much anything involving the ATF is complete bullshit, and basically a group of jackboots formed to provide prohibitionist thugs a job after there was no more prohibition. (How many times have you heard of an 'assault rifle' being used in a crime? once, twice? its a statistically insignificant percentage, even amongst the body of firearm crimes as a whole.)
Yep, that's the best policy if you're looking for a 'generic' resume, which fits the bill for most scenarios. A good job to fit your skills, however, should require a targetted resume.
In general, though, a CV is essentially a big business card.
Leave off references. They might keep your resume on file (depending on how many applicants they get, etc.) and more often than not seem to not check references in my experience. Maintain your reference list seperately, so that if they really want to check them, they can - and not all companies even ask for referneces when hiring. Just denote that references are available upon personal request.
Basically, this is how my resume looks:
... of course, as this works for me, I'm probably shooting myself in the foot by giving advice on the matter to duplicate it. :P
Education
This section just has the schooling and special certs I've got, with the dates of accomplishment and any other pertinent information (GPA, magna cum laude, etc), in table form.
Experience
This is a list of past/current employers and the dates of employment/contract, listed with what the job entailed. If you've got a lot, just list the most significant ones and note that you've done so to give a better picture of your overall experience (letting them know that additional information will be made available upon request).
Skills
Conceise, organized groups of technology skills - basically, buzz words. I add and remove skills as they become outdated/ill-used, and taylor the list for each application. Again, note there are other minor skills not included for breivity's sake - they don't care if you're able to configure and set up apache or what have you if you're being hired for a development position, but they'll probably be interested in experience in kernel development or apache module creation. Make it buzz-word compliant.
Interests
Build stock cars for a hobby? Involved in a competitive sport? Published a book? List them very briefly. Demonstrate cross-competency and personality - useless for screening, but if you get past the entry HR shmuck to a real interview, then chances are it'll be more personally beneficial than not having it. They can tell in synopsis that you're not just a coder/administrator/whatever and are knowledgeable outside your realm of expertise. Obviously it'll be more useful for certain types of jobs than others, so use discretion.
I try and keep it to a single page with multiple columns per section, with a right-face section header, and a 10pt font.
I'm late here, but consider the culture, weather, and locally available attractions in your decision. I've not worked for either, so I can't say, just something I always take into consideration. I imagine that, at the very least, you'd have a shot to work at the company you do not pick later down the line. Using that mentality, I would probably pick google first, as even though Google is getting big, Microsoft is bigger and has a lot more staying power and money.
:)
For me, "free food" appeals a great deal, as it's one of those little irritating things which bothers me throughout the day. You'd not have to cook, go shopping (much), or do much premeditation about what to eat. For me - someone who eats 4 large meals a day due to a high metabolism and does not particularly care for the act of eating in the first place (ie no "food fetish" like some people), this is a big plus. Single? Usually eat microwave pizzas? You'll end up saving thousands by working at google simply due to the food, as if you don't have free food, you'll probably end up eating out a lot more often, I imagine. That's a financial side of things you might want to keep in mind.
Another thing in Google's favor is that they, as far as I know, have a lot more campuses across the country, so you would have more opportunity for changing your location on a whim than with Microsoft. Who knows, you might not like the yuppie culture of Seattle (I know I sure as hell wouldn't). Culturally, Google seems to have a lot more diverse people - at least geographically. I imagine the geographical seperation of campuses even assists in the comapny being as diverse as possible.
If you've got an offer on the table already, be honest with both of them. Tell them you've got an offer from MS/Google, and would like to see what they would have you doing specifically, and would at least like to try and get a taste of the company culture before you make your decision. If they want you bad enough at the rate they're likely to pay you, chances are they'd fly you out - provided you've not already been out there.
From an outsider's view, Microsoft has little to offer that Google wouldn't also have. From where I'msitting, MS has a very tight-laced image - one of authoritarian worldview enforcement (at least as it pertains to software culture).
I would be interested in your response, just to know I didn't waste my time thinking about htis.
How much sense does that make, re: Saddam? Think about it - if you, as a kid, had your parents take all your porn magazines from you, and you didn't have any left, would you say to your friends, "Yeah man, my mom sucks, but I managed to secret a couple away! Hah, I'll show her!" ? No, I don't think so.
Could it be that it wasn't your career, but your obsession with computing and lack of life balance that did it?
I mean, it's not like a career in IT AND working on a post-graduate degree at the same time, while trying to maintain a marriage and raise a kid is what one would term a "low key schedule". In such a situation, if your career is doing well/better than average and your schooling is going well, you ARE neglecting family members. Two years of multiple day/evening classes, plus course work and papers, on top of 40+ hours a week makes it difficult to get out and get drunk once a week with buddies if you're single or uncommitted. A kid and a wife? Just asking for trouble.
If you're going to school and working full time, and your wife isn't, then I suspect you mis-paired yourselves anyway - she should've been doing something to help alieviate your work burden so you could better pay attention to her and your schooling, and in general be an emotionally healthier person.
FWIW, married, 2 kids (well, 1, but the 2nd is due this week), just finishing up my bachelors in IT, and here-and-there work to make ends meet. I could not maintain a "career" in IT at this point without going insane from lack of "me time" (or "sleep time"); if I were single and childless, it would be another story. Relationships and raising children take effort, but MOST IMPORTANTLY time, to not end up with a broken product.
it is WELL known that ff has problems when it comes to freeing memory after a tab or window is closed.
Well, if that something you love to do is to fuck, I can't really think of a better thing to get paid for (provided it's somewhere in California and there's a camera present, of course). And then you could really say, "I love my work."
Oh, I don't doubt in the least bit that they will.
.url files sitting around - I don't even use them. And I rarely open something with a "web browser" defaulting extension otherwise - I just click the firefox icon and away I go.
However, at least from where I sit, I don't think it'll matter much at all. I very well may be the exception, but I don't keep
In fact, I recently found out that somehow IE was made my default browser. I don't use IE, at all, so I'm not sure it happened, but I can only imagine how long it had been the case before I noticed it.
Unless firefox drastically decreases it's memory use (or simply more effective management, so it doesn't interfere with user behavior), or at the very least keeps it fairly constant from a current release, I can't imagine Firefox 2.0 being much of an improvement, to be honest. That's got to be the biggest gripe about it (and only then at about 40 or so tabs). I've not compared it to IE, however, and I can't imagine MS would release a product of superior quality in regard to memory use, so...
Other than that, I've not had a single problem with firefox in months, even in Windows. Every couple months I'll encounter a shoddy page with horrid gobs of javascript (myspace profiles, I'm looking at you), which is the only thing which has caused a fuck-up since I-can't-remember-when.
Hmm, this is just conjecture, but I would suppose from the information provided that this indicates more people are getting rid of, or more accurately replacing, their aging Windows machines with Macs.
I also suppose part of it has to do with the upcoming licensing scheme of Vista, as more companies attempt to phase out Windows in favor of "something else" - whatever that something is, provided it gets the job done and doesn't have the intrusive licensing schemes of Vista and all future MS products.
Yep.
BTW, don't play into this manipulative troll - you're letting him define the debate. He's calling the death penalty "murder". This assumes that there is no authority in such matters, none whatsoever, as it puts the state on equal moral footing as the murder. Additionally, it removes the concepts of responsibility, natural consequences, and justice. A murderer is someone who, unjustly, takes the life of another person with intent. It is just for that person to suffer the same fate as the person he denied life from, and not only is it the murderer's natural consequence to die, it is the responsibility of the society to make it so that it discourages a repeat scenario.
Why are we (as a society) so afraid of words and their potential impact? Are we so imature, violent and framented that speech alone will destroy the cohesion of our societey?
Unfortunately, yes. We have allowed - nay, encouraged - for the last 40 years the expansion of "diversity" in our country. When you emphasize the different and contrary amongst people groups, to the loss of past cultural traditions, you are causing division of unity - precisely what "diversity" means, really. It's the end goal - destroy the usefulness of language for communication of difficult ideas, and it will be easier to control the language. In the US, both the Democrats (through "politically correct" speech and double standards) and the Republicans under Bush have employed these tactics.
And what is the distinction that makes the clarification of "subject" vs. "citizen" corporeal?
A citizen has the right to go about doing what he wants, uninhibited provided he does not imbibe the rights of another or cause harm. A subject has none.
Sounds like the pepole of Britian are subjects.
America is seen as a strange, nutty, violent backwater by the rest of the world. Maybe in time you will come to appreciate the same checks and balances that we have.
It is funnnny what some people will believe if they're told it enough.
Apparently you've not been paying much attention for the last, oh, 20 or 30 years - the time it's been since what you're saying was even remotely true. This might come as a surprise to you, but US crime rates - namely, the violent ones - are at an all-time historic low. Meanwhile, Britian's crime rates, particularly the violent ones, are increasing.
Yes, the UK's firearm crime is increasing, and our's is decreasing - this, despite the fact that we've got the legal freedom to carry a weapon (gun, sword - whatever you can fit in your pants, basically) concealed in the vast majority of the states, with only states like California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and specifically cities like NYC, Washington DC, Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Francisco completely banning guns. Ironically, they've also got the highest crime rates in the country, and drastically skewer the average upwards.
While this might be a surprise to you, it is "safe" in the majority of America for attractive white women to go out and walk around neighborhoods, after dark. It's safe to leave your car and house unlocked - you are very unlikely to be burglarized, and there are very few people who ever are. Home invasions are nowhere near as common.
Furthermore, Britian has more a problem right now with Muslim ghetto contention than the US does with Mexican illegals - and the US is getting some 11 million Mexicans each year, courtesy-free from our southern border.
As far as the race thing is concerned, I don't think I have an issue with it so much, per se. However, the potential for abuse is there, most certainly, and just because it's being applied justly (IMO) in this situation does not mean that it will not be used for political means in the future to silence an opponent who is expressing un-PC views about, say, the Muslims. I don't know about over there, but over here I've seen pretty much anything and everything said by a white person that is negative about anyone else to be racist (or, for that matter, anyone lower on the PC scale of race baiting*), whereas black people can get away with pretty much anything they want. For instance, a black person calling me "whitey", "whitebread", "crackah", "vanilla" or anything like that? Perfectly acceptable, as it's considered "street slang" by the courts, even if it's mixed in with other derisive speech. If I say one thing to someone of another color along those lines, I am fucked, either financially due ot a lawsuit or due to obscure racism laws.
* white asian mexican black, or something like that. something similar follows for belief systems - catholic christian buddhist muslim athiest
I might be wrong in this, but as far as I know, the craft are made from metal. Metal, properly smelted and what have you, does not weaken with age unless coroded or put under significant stress.
Granted, it could simply be that the vibrations of re-entry have weakened the metals at the molecular level, but that should only impact operational strength not tolerance to such injuries.
How about ceramics and/or ballistic plates? I know they're heavy, so it's probably not viable - and I really don't know what's currently being used. But unless the object had a velocity over, say, 3000fps and wasn't heavy metal, it'd probably be stopped by such materials. They work well enough for body armor.