"It is a damn poor mind that cannot think of more than one way to spell a word" - Andrew Jackson
Pointing out spelling errors is a form of ad hominem attack. Its an attempt to show the speaker is not smart enough to take seriously, so their arguments can just be ignored. For my part I'd rather be right than spell right:p
I read my kids' dinosaur books, so I know all about this!:D
The warmblooded and coldblooded dicontomy is not accurate. Different creatures manage body temerature in different ways. Some do very little, and we call them cold blooded, and some do quiet alot and we call them warmblooded. Many dinosaurs, according to the latest childrens literature, were probably somewhere inbetween.
Nice summary of their position, but you seem to be reaching the same conclusion as alot of other readers - that they want to stop releasing patches. The guy's actual conclusion is that it is increasingly important that you immediately apply security patches since the patches themselves increase the danger posed by the hole. I agree that the way he phrased it suggests a misguided attitude towards the whole thing, aside from the hyperbole, there's nothing dumb about it.
If you read the article, nobody is claiming that only Microsoft finds exploits. They are saying that the people writing the viruses are not finding the exploits on their own - they are reverse engineering patches to find the exploits. They also don't say they should stop issuing patches, despite what people here seem to be assuming. The guy is issuing a caution about how patching quickly is becoming more important. There really isn't that much to get worked up about here.
Historically, Islam has been far more tolerant of other religions than has Christianity. The intellectual freedom enjoyed by the Islamic world meant that they preserved the great works of antiquity, like Plato and Aristotle, while christians abandoned them because of their pagan origin. Up until this century, Muslems, Christians and Jews lived together relatively successfully. The current violence and disorder is more a product of the end of colonialism than religious differences.
"For peace, they must abandon their fanaticism in God and Prophet"
Forcing people to give up their religion is the quickest way to make people hate you, and hate you for a long time. You like history references, I'm sure you can think of a few examples. If you are trying to say that there is something about Islam which prohibits Muslims from living in peace with other religions, you don't know much history after all.
"When they have come to that conclusion, whether they choose to join civilization, or whether they choose to meet their God by walking for miles across the radioactive fused-glass plain where once their meteorite stood, is up to them."
Your idea of civilization is very very far from what I would call civilized.
Nuking the place into glass certainly would cause peace in the region.
Peace in the region, yes. The rest of the world would probably be engulfed in conflict, but thats ok, we can keep nuking until everyone is dead and we have permantent peace, right?
If they have neither brains nor determination, how are they managing to fight us? We have the weapons, the wealth, and the political influence, they have nothing but their brains and determination. Pretending that your enemy is stupid and weak isn't going to help you win.
Thats an exageration. My company sells several non-trivial Java apps which are binary portable. While we've encountered some platform inconsistancies, particularly in networking, its been fairly trivial to find ways to make things work portably.
"I think he missed a good point. C# was the first to pull ALL of these things together under one hood and they did so a few years ago."
I think you in turn missed his point. The post he was replying to claimed that C# had innovated these features. He was demonstrating that those features had in fact existed in other languages previously.
Actually, the scoping of the loop var was changed in the standard a few years ago. Formerly it was function scope, now its scoped to the loop. Your version of the vc++ must be old. If you try that code in vc7, it will compile just fine. Even if you were correct about that being a bug though, it would not be a bug in the language but in the compiler implementation.
If you think that a drinking problem isn't work related you are even more naive than you originally appeared. You also missed the point: you would be a fool to answer honestly unless you have no weaknesses of consequence. What do you gain by honesty in this circumstance? This is a boilerplate interview question. They have no expectation of finding actual weaknesses; being able to dance around it is what is being tested.
"-1 Missing The Point. A question like this isn't intended to force you to bullshit. What it does is force the candidate to (hopefully) be honest and own up to a weakness about themselves. "
Sure, if you write "I have a drinking problem" or any other real weakness, they'll probably say "To reward you for being so honest, we're going to hire you."
"True, but there's more to work than productivity. Anti-social people make a dismal work environment and drag down morale."
Why should it would bother you that someone is hard at work in his office or cube and not chatting by the water cooler? In my experience, productivity is very good for moral, while being enmired in meetings all day, falling ever further behind schedule, is very bad for moral.
I actually work in a cube-less environment. Impromptu design discussions a half a foot from your desk, rehashing issues with each person who drifts by and joins the discussion, discussions being delayed when someone interupts with new issues are all commonplace occurances. In my office, when people want to get stuff done, they have to put on headphones and blast music to drown out distractions.
Maybe in a web design firm, or a consulting company, but if I have a really thorny technical problem, I'd far rather have one anti-social genius than a full team of developers who give great meeting.:p
A national safety council study found that hands-free cellphones do not improve driving performance over hand held cellphones:
http://www.nsc.org/news/nr012703.htm
I just glanced over the study, but it doesn't seem to reach the obvious conclusion: having conversations while driving is the problem, not the phone itself. If thats the case, then talking on cellphones is no more dangerous that simply talking to a passenger in the car with you. Surely we aren't going to ban that, are we? Also, it does not address the benefits of conversation for keeping you aware while driving at night.
You've set up a false choice of working for SCO and not working. I'd wager that if your friends could get themselves hired by SCO, there's probably at least one other company that would hire them.
"The conveniently erratic nature of paranormal and supernatural incidents is remarkable, because it largely precludes proper scientific observation and analysis from ever taking place."
While I don't believe in UFOs, ghosts, etc, I think this argument is weak. Perhaps these things are classified as supernatural precisely because they are erratic. If ghosts were easily seen, they would be considered a natural phenomenon.
I see you've adjusted nicely to the new 21st century style of non-confrontational journalism. Yes, now interviewers are expected to couch their questions in terms that implicilty legitimize the claims of the interviewee, no matter how counter-factual they may be.
Slashdot Mirror
"It is a damn poor mind that cannot think of more than one way to spell a word" - Andrew Jackson
:p
Pointing out spelling errors is a form of ad hominem attack. Its an attempt to show the speaker is not smart enough to take seriously, so their arguments can just be ignored. For my part I'd rather be right than spell right
That some were found to nest suggests more than simply protecting the eggs, they were keeping them warm.
Modern reptiles, such as crocodiles, lay eggs in nests. So do fish. I don't think that really says much one way or the other about the issue.
I read my kids' dinosaur books, so I know all about this! :D
The warmblooded and coldblooded dicontomy is not accurate. Different creatures manage body temerature in different ways. Some do very little, and we call them cold blooded, and some do quiet alot and we call them warmblooded. Many dinosaurs, according to the latest childrens literature, were probably somewhere inbetween.
Are you saying there's a difference between "was known" and "appears"?
compare "hardly ever exploited" to "is never vulnerable"
Nice summary of their position, but you seem to be reaching the same conclusion as alot of other readers - that they want to stop releasing patches. The guy's actual conclusion is that it is increasingly important that you immediately apply security patches since the patches themselves increase the danger posed by the hole. I agree that the way he phrased it suggests a misguided attitude towards the whole thing, aside from the hyperbole, there's nothing dumb about it.
If you read the article, nobody is claiming that only Microsoft finds exploits. They are saying that the people writing the viruses are not finding the exploits on their own - they are reverse engineering patches to find the exploits. They also don't say they should stop issuing patches, despite what people here seem to be assuming. The guy is issuing a caution about how patching quickly is becoming more important. There really isn't that much to get worked up about here.
Historically, Islam has been far more tolerant of other religions than has Christianity. The intellectual freedom enjoyed by the Islamic world meant that they preserved the great works of antiquity, like Plato and Aristotle, while christians abandoned them because of their pagan origin. Up until this century, Muslems, Christians and Jews lived together relatively successfully. The current violence and disorder is more a product of the end of colonialism than religious differences.
"For peace, they must abandon their fanaticism in God and Prophet"
Forcing people to give up their religion is the quickest way to make people hate you, and hate you for a long time. You like history references, I'm sure you can think of a few examples. If you are trying to say that there is something about Islam which prohibits Muslims from living in peace with other religions, you don't know much history after all.
"When they have come to that conclusion, whether they choose to join civilization, or whether they choose to meet their God by walking for miles across the radioactive fused-glass plain where once their meteorite stood, is up to them."
Your idea of civilization is very very far from what I would call civilized.
Nuking the place into glass certainly would cause peace in the region.
Peace in the region, yes. The rest of the world would probably be engulfed in conflict, but thats ok, we can keep nuking until everyone is dead and we have permantent peace, right?
If they have neither brains nor determination, how are they managing to fight us? We have the weapons, the wealth, and the political influence, they have nothing but their brains and determination. Pretending that your enemy is stupid and weak isn't going to help you win.
"That's only true for trivial applications."
Thats an exageration. My company sells several non-trivial Java apps which are binary portable. While we've encountered some platform inconsistancies, particularly in networking, its been fairly trivial to find ways to make things work portably.
"I think he missed a good point. C# was the first to pull ALL of these things together under one hood and they did so a few years ago."
I think you in turn missed his point. The post he was replying to claimed that C# had innovated these features. He was demonstrating that those features had in fact existed in other languages previously.
Actually, the scoping of the loop var was changed in the standard a few years ago. Formerly it was function scope, now its scoped to the loop. Your version of the vc++ must be old. If you try that code in vc7, it will compile just fine. Even if you were correct about that being a bug though, it would not be a bug in the language but in the compiler implementation.
Its actually Gaston Julia, not Julia Gaston
Go back and read the article. The concern is not so much environmental impact but that the spirit of open research will be lost.
Her: "I sometimes wonder whether we were really meant for each other"
You: "Ok, get ready, the troll king is going to pop up any moment. Blast him with your fire bolt!"
Her: "I worry that we don't communicate enough"
You: "Huh? I don't think...look! There's the troll king! Attack!"
Nice try, but from my experience, she'll probably want you to focus on the conversation, not on getting a high score.
If you think that a drinking problem isn't work related you are even more naive than you originally appeared. You also missed the point: you would be a fool to answer honestly unless you have no weaknesses of consequence. What do you gain by honesty in this circumstance? This is a boilerplate interview question. They have no expectation of finding actual weaknesses; being able to dance around it is what is being tested.
"-1 Missing The Point. A question like this isn't intended to force you to bullshit. What it does is force the candidate to (hopefully) be honest and own up to a weakness about themselves. "
Sure, if you write "I have a drinking problem" or any other real weakness, they'll probably say "To reward you for being so honest, we're going to hire you."
" all it takes is one smooth-talking demagogue to sway the opinions of millions of uninformed people. Legislation would become a battle of TV ads."
Which differs from the current situation how?
"True, but there's more to work than productivity. Anti-social people make a dismal work environment and drag down morale."
Why should it would bother you that someone is hard at work in his office or cube and not chatting by the water cooler? In my experience, productivity is very good for moral, while being enmired in meetings all day, falling ever further behind schedule, is very bad for moral.
I actually work in a cube-less environment. Impromptu design discussions a half a foot from your desk, rehashing issues with each person who drifts by and joins the discussion, discussions being delayed when someone interupts with new issues are all commonplace occurances. In my office, when people want to get stuff done, they have to put on headphones and blast music to drown out distractions.
Maybe in a web design firm, or a consulting company, but if I have a really thorny technical problem, I'd far rather have one anti-social genius than a full team of developers who give great meeting. :p
A national safety council study found that hands-free cellphones do not improve driving performance over hand held cellphones:
http://www.nsc.org/news/nr012703.htm
I just glanced over the study, but it doesn't seem to reach the obvious conclusion: having conversations while driving is the problem, not the phone itself. If thats the case, then talking on cellphones is no more dangerous that simply talking to a passenger in the car with you. Surely we aren't going to ban that, are we? Also, it does not address the benefits of conversation for keeping you aware while driving at night.
You've set up a false choice of working for SCO and not working. I'd wager that if your friends could get themselves hired by SCO, there's probably at least one other company that would hire them.
"The conveniently erratic nature of paranormal and supernatural incidents is remarkable, because it largely precludes proper scientific observation and analysis from ever taking place."
While I don't believe in UFOs, ghosts, etc, I think this argument is weak. Perhaps these things are classified as supernatural precisely because they are erratic. If ghosts were easily seen, they would be considered a natural phenomenon.
I see you've adjusted nicely to the new 21st century style of non-confrontational journalism. Yes, now interviewers are expected to couch their questions in terms that implicilty legitimize the claims of the interviewee, no matter how counter-factual they may be.