I guess eating vegitables and standing up for peace is worse when you compare it to injust wars, thousands of innocent deaths and religious beliefs being flushed onto general public.
Beats me... I had more luck burning CDs on Linux than on Windows.
I do admit that I was not 100% fair when I described Mac OS in my previous post because I found that certain OSes can be just as nice. I was really impressed with Fedora Core 2; however, small little things like out-of-the-box hardware support and well-polished applications are quite rare in Linux world. That simply kills the idea of using Linux as a desktop if you work depends on more than just a bunch of shell scripts.
I did not think of using a Mac until my last year in college when my FreeBSD box crapped out numerous time during my final software engineering project. I spent all my graduation money on a Mac and I still think that it was a good move because I get the power of Unix and Open Source with a nice interface and a system that does not crash and accepts almost anything I choose to stick in the USB port.
My primary reasons for using a Mac are:
I still can use all my office applications without problems. Office for Mac is not bad at all!
As a Unix dude who runs several boxes at home, I find it almost impossible to use windows because I am am glued to Terminal from time to time. I tried Cygwin and I do use it at work; however, I do not like it as much due to the lack of complete intergration into my box.
Mac has been secure for me. Although I consider myself to be a power user, I do have a girlfriend who likes to download all sorts of crap and click on everything that flashes. I haven't had problems with viruses so far.
Mac OS 10.3 has never crashed on me. I do not remember a single time when something went wrong to the point where I had to do cold boot.
Darwinports rule. Open Source programs just the way I like them:)
Mac is based on Unix and that is a key because I like maintaining all my systems in the same way. For example, I can run the same backup scripts with almost the same variables across all my boxes.
Plug-n-Play, as opposed to Plug-n-Pray on Windows. So far, I had no problems with digital cameras, USB keys, scanners, printers, etc. Plug it in and it works.
Human-Computer Interaction and Mac GUI. I cannot stress this enough: details are important! Natural things, like dragging an image from Safari browser or to iChat's icon, make our lives easier. Smooth fonts appeal greater. Software applications, just like people, will be taken more seriously if they are well polished. Thankfully, Apple spent an enormous amount of time and money on HCI research and then turned the results into something productive. I like OS X because it feels more natural than any Windows edition I've used so far.
This is a small one, but CD burning works with OS X without any problems right out of the box. No additional software installations needed.
This list was enough to convince me:)
This was my first time voting and I have only one suggestion so far: put normal people in charge of voter verification. This morning I spent quite some time waiting in line because the lady who was supposed to verify voters did not speak English and was half-dead. Apparently she was deaf and/or stupid as well because everybody had to shout their address at least three times in order for her to understand it.
Fortunately, that was the only negative thing about my experience. Overall everything went smooth and without any problems.
To put it straight, my major issue with Mr. Bush is that he's a social conservative and I am a social libera. Do you not think that our gov't should leave people's decisions alone and let people decide what they want on a state by state basis?
I feel that the current president and his base aim at limiting my personal freedoms based on their beliefs and fear. Definitions such as marriage, community and moral values are very ambiguous and cannot constitute what is right and what is wrong by passing laws. We should let people to decide whatever they want to do; simple as that. Let's put it this way, if it were up to me, I'd let a man marry a dog as long as their union is not damaging one of the partners:)
I will disagree with your on religion one more time. Schools in Georgia were about to ban evolution from bio classes. The administration thinks that abstinence is the best sex education you can get when scientists and teachers disagree based on well-analyzed statistics. Our president believed that god was talking through him. What the fuck? He's against abortions and cell stem research yet he said nothing about clinics that throw away human embryos. He's pro-life and pro-death penalty. The list can go on and on.
I do not believe that Kerry is the ideal candidate, but damn compared to Bush I'd choose him anytime.
No, not Christian. He just wants everybody to share HIS religious values. In fact, he is probably one of the most outspoken presidents when it comes to topics of religion. Just look at his base and check the polls.
Frankly, I do not give a fuck whever you believe in god or not. I do not like a president who openly tries to integrate religion into our government. I do not support people like Elizabeth Dole (a vivid Bush supporter) who says things like:
The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. The right to worship God isn't something Republicans invented, but it is something Republicans will defend.
Marriage is important not because it is a convenient invention or the latest reality show marriage is important because it is the cornerstone of civilization, and the foundation of the family. Marriage between a man and a woman isn't something Republicans invented, but it is something Republicans will defend.
NOTE: This is transcription of her speech from RNC. Look at http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/8/31/232517.shtml for more information.
The issue of religion is enough to take my vote away from Bush because he clearly let his faith influence his decisions on may occasions. Plus, if he's so fucking religious, how come he does not object massive civilian casualties in Iraq? Do you not see his motivations for amending the Constitution in order to come up with definition of marriage? Do you not see the "god-fearing" people who support them? Just the fact that some of Bush's supporters spread rumors that Kerry will ban bible reading freaks me out. Listen, the point is that we live in the 21st century. It is time to move forward.
I am glad that your brought up taxes. See, your assumption is correct based on one thing: the "rich" will spend extra money that they gain from lower taxes on people like you and me. This may or may not be correct. In fact, I could have agreed with you on giving more to the rich BUT NOT when the country is in debt up to its ears. When he signed a bill that allowed more spending on our war, I felt like if somebody swiped a credit card through my ass: I am fairly young and I know that paying for this whole fucking safari is going to be up to me or my kids. Both Republicans and Democrats agree that running up a tab is not the best practice when it comes to gov't accounting because eventually somebody is going to pay for that. Do you tell your kids to go ahead and buy anything they want because they can pay for it later?
I respect that you have a different point of view, but as I said, these were only my points. I have a lot of them, you can call me at home and we'll chat:) Kerry is not a perfect candidate in my opinion; however, I believe that he's going to be a better president than Mr. Bush.
Finally, I do not believe in the PATRIOT Act and other ways of mastrubation our gov't put up for us in order to limit our freedoms. What happened to the laws that started with "Congress shall not....?". Our civil liberties are getting slammed by the current administration and I am not going to support that. Freedom of speech is being limited. People can be searched and questioned without explanation. I guess you haven't lived in Soviet Union in order to understand what this shit can lead to. As long as our administration (any administration) will continue doing it, I will push against it, be it Kerry, Bush or anybody else.
What are the chances that 2 trial lawyers (who's biggest contributors are the trial lawyers associations) giving us the litigation reforms so crucial to getting escalating health care and pharm costs under control for the long term viability of our economy?
Do you honestly believe that Kerry's and Edwards' judicial backgrounds have had or will have any effect on our health care system? This is nothing but a spin by Republicans because they are running out of ideas and insults.
About a half of today's kids and teenagers are overweight in this country. Obesity is a rising problem. People live longer and longer due to medical breakthroughs that enable us eat and shit well into our seventies, eighties and nineties. As babyboomers get older and today's fat kids develop chronic conditions our costs are going to go through the roof. I do not think that Kerry's radical plan will change our health care BUT I would not bring his or his running mates' past into the game.
I really hope that all you who are reading this post do know your candidates. However, I will publish my points of view for those ones who are undecided. Here is why I vote for Kerry:
Kerry does not want to increase the power of the federal goverment. As he stated, he would like the states to decided on several particular policies. This is as "American" as it gets. Bush, on the other hand, wants to increase the amount of control that fed. gov't has over the states.
Kerry does not want to embed discrimination into our Constitution. I am not gay, but I believe in equality and justice for all. How can one expect a fair treatment while the others are being denied civil liberties? Think about it, would straight men beat their wives if the concept of heterosexual marriage was perfect? If you want to protect marriage, do me a favor: push for women's rights and stand against family violence.
Kerry does not shove the Bible up my ass. Whether you are religious or not, you should remember that religion and state are separate in this country. Just because you believe in god, it does not mean that your beliefs should become a part of my life. I have nothing about personal religious traditions, but I think that citing the Bible when it comes to creating laws is pushing it. When is the next round of witch trials, Mr. Bush?
Kerry is for cooperation with international entities and other countries. Remember, we did not win WWII without help from numerous states. Despite personal feelings we cannot spit at the French and tell the Germans to shut the fuck up and eat that kraut. A world is a big pile of shit and all of us are in it equally.
I support women's right to choose.
During the debates Mr. Bush did not have enough guts to admit three things that he screwed. Let me help him out: "No Child Left Behind," Iraq,
tax cuts for the rich.
If you think that Kerry is a "flip-flopper," think how many times YOU changed your mind and why you did it; did it make you a bad person? Although this may not be a populate saying in the United States -- it's French -- but "only idiots do not change their minds." Would you rather vote for a person who can adjust his/her decisions based on feedback (just like the spiral model of software engineering) or you would you prefer a blind follower of some sort of ideology?
Kerry is intelligent, Bush is not. Do me a favor, compare Kerry and Bush rallies, speeches, etc. You will see a difference. Our current president speaks like a fucking second grader with "internets," "budget men" and "group of folks."
48 Nobel prize winners support Kerry.
Kerry promises pro-environmental policies.
This is a strech, but compare the economies and educational systems of "blue" vs. "red" states. It will give you a rough idea who is voting for Mr. Bush. Also, take a look at rallies and the supporters of both candidates. I have nothing against Republicans because I tend to vote for the principals, not the party. However, it is not the case during these elections...
Well, I believe this is enough for starters. Ideally, I would like to see a president who is conservative when it comes to spending and liberal with social policies. However, this is never going to happen. There is too much bigotry in this world.
When I was growing up in the former Soviet Union, our market (or whatever we had) was flooded with Indian movies. These were abso-fucking-lutely horrible pieces of work and I would not be caught dead watching them in my life. And to be honest with you, your argument is dead: comparing India to the United States is like comparing oranges to apples. These countries have different cultures, histories and perspectives on life. I do not mean to offend you, but it sounded like you were looking for a harsh reply.
Do you think Americans know -- or care for that matter -- about any famous Indian people? Do you believe that we want to know them? Fuck no. All I want to do is to do honest work, earn money, have sex and retire. I do not give a damn about people across the world and I would like them to return the favor.
One more thing, American infrastructure is relatively old compared to Brazilian of Indian. Of course I WOULD LIKE to see more Linux and less gov't waste on M$ products, but cannot change things overnight because it will not be practical. There you have it.
I have been in IT for a relatively long time and yet I have not seen one developer who promised something that could not be done! Most of the time developers are on the conservative side because they know that no development process is perfect. However, things are different when it comes to marketing department...
Computer Science is a good major to be in. It is useful, hard and interesting at the same time. However, given the fact that IT job cuts are on the rise, students should learn more things than just coding.
I am a recent CS grad. I work in the field and yet I am thinking of getting a second degree that is not related to computer science because I realized that in several years developers who know only one thing -- that is coding -- will become extinct. What you need to teach CS students is how to develop valid and correct solutions that can be used by real people and businesses. These solutions must be well designed first; then developed. If I got a cent for every piss poor designed program that I have seen in my life, I'd be Bill Gates:)
Developers solve problems with code; however, just because you have an ability to write a program does not make this program a valid solution! I have noticed that there are too many people with excellent software engineering skills that are simply out of touch with reality and its business side. If your "cool" program does not solve a problem it is absolutely useless in the real business world (the world where you get a pay check for what you do).
Despite being relatively young, I have been employed in the field during all downturns. I managed to survive using only one rule: you must come up with solutions that are valuable for customers who are willing to pay for it. Unfortunately, many of the recent comp. sci. grads do not understand this rule. Instead of focusing on real life and its business needs, they spend their time learning languages without even knowing what these languages are good for. Then they use wrong tools for wrong tasks. My favorite example is my friend who used J2EE to build a site that could have been (and should have been!) done in PHP. He spent half a year on the fucking thing just to realize that a simpler solution could do everything that he wanted!
Then there are people who run into terrible coding problems because their design is flawed. For some odd fucking reason people never think before they start implementing. I use one great rule: software engineering does not provide efficient solutions for some of the problems. Period. Too many people jump into coding without even thinking about the problem. They waste their time on something that can either be done manually with lower cost OR cannot be done at all. The worst thing is that most of these people are afraid of throwing their initial design away and starting from scratch...
With this in mind, here is what I think every comp. sci. student should know:
How to meet business needs with software engineering. How to "read" requirements and come up with solutions that meet them.
How to realize that your design leads to implementation problems and when to throw such a design away.
A well-written program is good. A well-written program that meets customers' needs is better.
How to use a right tool for the right task.
How to become employed and stay employed.
How to use computer science in various aspects of real life. When I am talking about real life, I am talking about something useful that can be actually used by people. I found out that this can be achieved by taking a second minor or getting a second major that is not related to technology.
Hey, I was in your shoes two years ago. I did switch and... I am still using the system that I bought. Here is what I got:
1. PowerMac G4 867MHz.
2. 768MB of RAM.
3. No monitor.
I bought the box from a local retailer, SmallDog Electronics (Vermont) and used my old monitor with it. So far, it has been great. If you do not want to shell out mad cash, get a used system. If I were you, I'd get something with a CPU 1+ MHz and spend extra bucks on memory. I do Java development, surfing and video editing from time to time; no complaints so far.
If you know how to use UNIX (at least the basics) you will find that OS X is very useful because it offers the best of both worlds. Stability is solid.
1. Take a picture of a red object against white background.
2. Take a picture of a green object against white background.
3. Find a person with zits/razor cuts on his/her face and take a picture of that person.
Compare these pics to what you see in real life. Chances are that your reds will be off and the person will have a skin with more orange in it. If so, throw your camera away, unless you do not care about these things. If your camera is close to the real world, you're lucky:)
Here are some other things to try:
1. Take a picture at night. Look for purple fringing. This will determine the quality of your lens. If you have an SLR, you should not be concerned: you can change the lens. If you have a point-and-shoot that produces this result, stay away from night shots:)
2. If you do not have an SLR, try to test the camera for vingetting (dark corners) and barell effects. This can be done by taking a picture of a grid or something like that.
IT is more than development. When I got out of school in 2003 with a degree in Computer Science I knew that I was not going to become a developer despite good grades, expericence and a positive attitude. I started looking for alternative positions where I could use my knowledge: technical support, system administration, etc. Now I do enterprise technical support and I am fairly satisfied with it.
As job markets evolve, so should our careers. I predict that the U.S. will have less development jobs in the future; however, the IT is not going to go away. We will have more competition and different jobs to compete for:) Let's take a look at B2B support for example: people will have to install and configure complex software, assist high-end architects and developers with integration and maintain networks; there you go. I suspect that soon customer support will become a major issue as software becomes more complex. There will be a market for knowledgeable support techs who can travel around the country and assist in development of custom solutions (that is what my company does already). Then you will have a need for system integrators that will adapt that "imported" software to the needs of U.S. customers . I know many companies that do that already. In the end you'll end up with a less stressful job and more time to code on your own.
And if you miss coding, why do you not invent a cool Open Source project and work on it? Also, you can program on your own if you must do it for personal satisfaction.
Look, no offense to you, but this topic is close to my heart because people in my family deal with people who are disabled and who can use this kind of research. Do you believe that I would not know the difference between the two? I hear about this shit every damn day... If you are not close to somebody who is suffering, you WILL NEVER understand what a possible breakthrough can mean for that person.
For starters, ASCs cannot be diversified. If you take those cells from a brain, you can only re-create neural cells. Then there is an issue with regeneration of damaged tissues: ASCs are not very useful for those purposes. ECSs, unlike ASCs, are easy to grow and they can adapt to different conditions. They have their own shortcomings, but their potential is yet unknown! The reason for not being able to do more experiements is because we do not have many ECS lines around here, in the United States. It costs about $5K per vial of ESCs; therefore, without governments support the research is NOT going anywhere and we will not be able to move forward. We simply cannot stop research because somebody thinks that something is not ethical: religion and science do not mix.
I admit that adult stem cells are useful; however, not going forward with embryonic stem cell research would be an equivalent of stopping Galileo from using a telescope.
You should spend an hour caring for a person with a spinal cord injury. Better, why do you not move in with such a person and live with them for a week or so. How many of you will handle it?
I am not taking this out of my ass; I have actually been around people who cannot move and have no hope of improvement because of their conditions. My best friend has a mild-form of CP; the guy has been suffering all his life because his fucking legs are crooked and there is nothing he can do about it! Do me a favor, look into his eyes and then tell him that you are against stem cell research. Tell him that it sucks to be him because he was born different. Then visit a nursing home and try to take care of patients with Alzheimer's....
I still do not realize why this issue is an issue for our presidential candidates... This is a no brainer that should not be discussed in a country where religion is separate from the state. Then again, just like Kerry I am a liberal guy from Massachusetts:)
I used to work for IBM and work with embedded MontaVista products. Those guys simply rock... I guess Linus does not realize the full potential of what real time functionality can do to Linux:)
I am probably one of the very few Mac users who does not rave about iPods or any other Apple products. I do not know why, but for some freaking reason I do not feel obligated to be a part of the crazy clan of Mac clowns that will sell their first-born for the latest shit-on-a-stick made by Apple. Also, I found it ironic that there are Mac users that blame the rest of the world for being corporate slaves and not thinking outside the box, while taking it up the ass whenever Steve and Co. decide to release yet another overpriced item. That's what makes this "iPod killer" semi-attractive to me.Here is why I would get this player over iPod:
1. I would hate to be a part of this whole damn Apple clan.
2. Simply retarded iPod commercials.
3. Apple featuring kids, who were caught downloading songs, in its commercials.
4. I refuse to shell out big bucks for a product that is going to be outdated (at least by our society's standards) within two months.
Plus, if you take a look at iPod, it is really expensive if you want to have all the damn functionality that can be desired by a vivid music fan. I want that damn FM/AM add-on to be included with the product, an extra battery (w/o the extra price), a belt-clip, a pair of headphones, a couple of cases, a small remote control, etc. If you add all these things up, iPod will be pretty freaking pricy.
Seriously, Google used to be a cool company back in the day. They had a nice search engine, a plain web site without stupid banners and the service worked well. Now the company is different; it acts like a snob on the block and there is nothing oh-so-special about it anymore. Just another fucking corporation for profit. I bet they'll do anything for a quick buck in the nearest future:)
My buddy and I opened the magazine and found the test. We showed it to another friend of ours and then decided to take it collectively. After molesting our brains for about 30 minutes, we called it quits. We are not math wizzes, but all of us have good jobs (one does R&D for U.S. Navy, the other buddy and I do software stuff) and franky speaking, we would not want to work for an environment that treated us like high school kids.
Believe it or not, once I was asked about my SAT score during an interview. I got an offer, but I dropped a ball on that one because I simply did not want to go back to school. I think Google's the same. The bottom line is "Look, not everybody has a Ph.D. in Math; however, there are plenty of smart and hardworking individuals who can benefit a company by strong team work and good attitudes."
Notice, I am not saying "Hire everybody else or die!" I am simply stating that there are good and smart individuals who can be productive...
Slashdot Mirror
I guess eating vegitables and standing up for peace is worse when you compare it to injust wars, thousands of innocent deaths and religious beliefs being flushed onto general public.
Beats me... I had more luck burning CDs on Linux than on Windows.
I do admit that I was not 100% fair when I described Mac OS in my previous post because I found that certain OSes can be just as nice. I was really impressed with Fedora Core 2; however, small little things like out-of-the-box hardware support and well-polished applications are quite rare in Linux world. That simply kills the idea of using Linux as a desktop if you work depends on more than just a bunch of shell scripts.
Of course, most of my servers run BSDs :)
I did not think of using a Mac until my last year in college when my FreeBSD box crapped out numerous time during my final software engineering project. I spent all my graduation money on a Mac and I still think that it was a good move because I get the power of Unix and Open Source with a nice interface and a system that does not crash and accepts almost anything I choose to stick in the USB port.
My primary reasons for using a Mac are:
I still can use all my office applications without problems. Office for Mac is not bad at all!
As a Unix dude who runs several boxes at home, I find it almost impossible to use windows because I am am glued to Terminal from time to time. I tried Cygwin and I do use it at work; however, I do not like it as much due to the lack of complete intergration into my box.
Mac has been secure for me. Although I consider myself to be a power user, I do have a girlfriend who likes to download all sorts of crap and click on everything that flashes. I haven't had problems with viruses so far.
Mac OS 10.3 has never crashed on me. I do not remember a single time when something went wrong to the point where I had to do cold boot.
Darwinports rule. Open Source programs just the way I like them :)
Mac is based on Unix and that is a key because I like maintaining all my systems in the same way. For example, I can run the same backup scripts with almost the same variables across all my boxes.
Plug-n-Play, as opposed to Plug-n-Pray on Windows. So far, I had no problems with digital cameras, USB keys, scanners, printers, etc. Plug it in and it works.
Human-Computer Interaction and Mac GUI. I cannot stress this enough: details are important! Natural things, like dragging an image from Safari browser or to iChat's icon, make our lives easier. Smooth fonts appeal greater. Software applications, just like people, will be taken more seriously if they are well polished. Thankfully, Apple spent an enormous amount of time and money on HCI research and then turned the results into something productive. I like OS X because it feels more natural than any Windows edition I've used so far.
This is a small one, but CD burning works with OS X without any problems right out of the box. No additional software installations needed. This list was enough to convince me :)
This was my first time voting and I have only one suggestion so far: put normal people in charge of voter verification. This morning I spent quite some time waiting in line because the lady who was supposed to verify voters did not speak English and was half-dead. Apparently she was deaf and/or stupid as well because everybody had to shout their address at least three times in order for her to understand it.
Fortunately, that was the only negative thing about my experience. Overall everything went smooth and without any problems.
To put it straight, my major issue with Mr. Bush is that he's a social conservative and I am a social libera. Do you not think that our gov't should leave people's decisions alone and let people decide what they want on a state by state basis?
I feel that the current president and his base aim at limiting my personal freedoms based on their beliefs and fear. Definitions such as marriage, community and moral values are very ambiguous and cannot constitute what is right and what is wrong by passing laws. We should let people to decide whatever they want to do; simple as that. Let's put it this way, if it were up to me, I'd let a man marry a dog as long as their union is not damaging one of the partners :)
I will disagree with your on religion one more time. Schools in Georgia were about to ban evolution from bio classes. The administration thinks that abstinence is the best sex education you can get when scientists and teachers disagree based on well-analyzed statistics. Our president believed that god was talking through him. What the fuck? He's against abortions and cell stem research yet he said nothing about clinics that throw away human embryos. He's pro-life and pro-death penalty. The list can go on and on.
I do not believe that Kerry is the ideal candidate, but damn compared to Bush I'd choose him anytime.
No, not Christian. He just wants everybody to share HIS religious values. In fact, he is probably one of the most outspoken presidents when it comes to topics of religion. Just look at his base and check the polls.
Frankly, I do not give a fuck whever you believe in god or not. I do not like a president who openly tries to integrate religion into our government. I do not support people like Elizabeth Dole (a vivid Bush supporter) who says things like:
The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. The right to worship God isn't something Republicans invented, but it is something Republicans will defend.
Marriage is important not because it is a convenient invention or the latest reality show marriage is important because it is the cornerstone of civilization, and the foundation of the family. Marriage between a man and a woman isn't something Republicans invented, but it is something Republicans will defend.
1 /232517.shtml for more information.
NOTE: This is transcription of her speech from RNC. Look at http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/8/3
The issue of religion is enough to take my vote away from Bush because he clearly let his faith influence his decisions on may occasions. Plus, if he's so fucking religious, how come he does not object massive civilian casualties in Iraq? Do you not see his motivations for amending the Constitution in order to come up with definition of marriage? Do you not see the "god-fearing" people who support them? Just the fact that some of Bush's supporters spread rumors that Kerry will ban bible reading freaks me out. Listen, the point is that we live in the 21st century. It is time to move forward.
I am glad that your brought up taxes. See, your assumption is correct based on one thing: the "rich" will spend extra money that they gain from lower taxes on people like you and me. This may or may not be correct. In fact, I could have agreed with you on giving more to the rich BUT NOT when the country is in debt up to its ears. When he signed a bill that allowed more spending on our war, I felt like if somebody swiped a credit card through my ass: I am fairly young and I know that paying for this whole fucking safari is going to be up to me or my kids. Both Republicans and Democrats agree that running up a tab is not the best practice when it comes to gov't accounting because eventually somebody is going to pay for that. Do you tell your kids to go ahead and buy anything they want because they can pay for it later?
I respect that you have a different point of view, but as I said, these were only my points. I have a lot of them, you can call me at home and we'll chat :) Kerry is not a perfect candidate in my opinion; however, I believe that he's going to be a better president than Mr. Bush.
Finally, I do not believe in the PATRIOT Act and other ways of mastrubation our gov't put up for us in order to limit our freedoms. What happened to the laws that started with "Congress shall not....?". Our civil liberties are getting slammed by the current administration and I am not going to support that. Freedom of speech is being limited. People can be searched and questioned without explanation. I guess you haven't lived in Soviet Union in order to understand what this shit can lead to. As long as our administration (any administration) will continue doing it, I will push against it, be it Kerry, Bush or anybody else.
Of course I am :) Keep in mind that Libretarian movementis fairly young and it will take sometime for the rest of the country to understand it.
I MUST vote for Kerry because the Bible is too big to fit up my ass. Along with other neo-conservative policies of Mr. Bush :)
Hi, I am libertarian and I am going to vote for Mr. Kerry for the following reasons:
Kerry does not want to expand federal government and its influence over states' powers. (He does not want to change the constitution).
Kerry is a social liberal, meaning that he won't throw a bible at me whenever I disagree with his policies.
Just two of these issues are more than enough to steal my vote. Plus, Kerry supports woman's right to choose.
In reality, I would like to see a president that:
Legalizes weed.
Legalizes prositution.
Encourages FAIR free trade.
Limits the power of the federal government. Remember the times when laws were written as "Congress shall make no law....?"
Takes religion out of equation.
What are the chances that 2 trial lawyers (who's biggest contributors are the trial lawyers associations) giving us the litigation reforms so crucial to getting escalating health care and pharm costs under control for the long term viability of our economy?
Do you honestly believe that Kerry's and Edwards' judicial backgrounds have had or will have any effect on our health care system? This is nothing but a spin by Republicans because they are running out of ideas and insults.
About a half of today's kids and teenagers are overweight in this country. Obesity is a rising problem. People live longer and longer due to medical breakthroughs that enable us eat and shit well into our seventies, eighties and nineties. As babyboomers get older and today's fat kids develop chronic conditions our costs are going to go through the roof. I do not think that Kerry's radical plan will change our health care BUT I would not bring his or his running mates' past into the game.
I really hope that all you who are reading this post do know your candidates. However, I will publish my points of view for those ones who are undecided. Here is why I vote for Kerry:
Kerry does not want to increase the power of the federal goverment. As he stated, he would like the states to decided on several particular policies. This is as "American" as it gets. Bush, on the other hand, wants to increase the amount of control that fed. gov't has over the states.
Kerry does not want to embed discrimination into our Constitution. I am not gay, but I believe in equality and justice for all. How can one expect a fair treatment while the others are being denied civil liberties? Think about it, would straight men beat their wives if the concept of heterosexual marriage was perfect? If you want to protect marriage, do me a favor: push for women's rights and stand against family violence.
Kerry does not shove the Bible up my ass. Whether you are religious or not, you should remember that religion and state are separate in this country. Just because you believe in god, it does not mean that your beliefs should become a part of my life. I have nothing about personal religious traditions, but I think that citing the Bible when it comes to creating laws is pushing it. When is the next round of witch trials, Mr. Bush?
Kerry is for cooperation with international entities and other countries. Remember, we did not win WWII without help from numerous states. Despite personal feelings we cannot spit at the French and tell the Germans to shut the fuck up and eat that kraut. A world is a big pile of shit and all of us are in it equally.
I support women's right to choose.
During the debates Mr. Bush did not have enough guts to admit three things that he screwed. Let me help him out: "No Child Left Behind," Iraq, tax cuts for the rich.
If you think that Kerry is a "flip-flopper," think how many times YOU changed your mind and why you did it; did it make you a bad person? Although this may not be a populate saying in the United States -- it's French -- but "only idiots do not change their minds." Would you rather vote for a person who can adjust his/her decisions based on feedback (just like the spiral model of software engineering) or you would you prefer a blind follower of some sort of ideology?
Kerry is intelligent, Bush is not. Do me a favor, compare Kerry and Bush rallies, speeches, etc. You will see a difference. Our current president speaks like a fucking second grader with "internets," "budget men" and "group of folks."
48 Nobel prize winners support Kerry.
Kerry promises pro-environmental policies.
This is a strech, but compare the economies and educational systems of "blue" vs. "red" states. It will give you a rough idea who is voting for Mr. Bush. Also, take a look at rallies and the supporters of both candidates. I have nothing against Republicans because I tend to vote for the principals, not the party. However, it is not the case during these elections...
Well, I believe this is enough for starters. Ideally, I would like to see a president who is conservative when it comes to spending and liberal with social policies. However, this is never going to happen. There is too much bigotry in this world.
When I was growing up in the former Soviet Union, our market (or whatever we had) was flooded with Indian movies. These were abso-fucking-lutely horrible pieces of work and I would not be caught dead watching them in my life. And to be honest with you, your argument is dead: comparing India to the United States is like comparing oranges to apples. These countries have different cultures, histories and perspectives on life. I do not mean to offend you, but it sounded like you were looking for a harsh reply.
Do you think Americans know -- or care for that matter -- about any famous Indian people? Do you believe that we want to know them? Fuck no. All I want to do is to do honest work, earn money, have sex and retire. I do not give a damn about people across the world and I would like them to return the favor.
One more thing, American infrastructure is relatively old compared to Brazilian of Indian. Of course I WOULD LIKE to see more Linux and less gov't waste on M$ products, but cannot change things overnight because it will not be practical. There you have it.
I have been in IT for a relatively long time and yet I have not seen one developer who promised something that could not be done! Most of the time developers are on the conservative side because they know that no development process is perfect. However, things are different when it comes to marketing department...
Computer Science is a good major to be in. It is useful, hard and interesting at the same time. However, given the fact that IT job cuts are on the rise, students should learn more things than just coding.
I am a recent CS grad. I work in the field and yet I am thinking of getting a second degree that is not related to computer science because I realized that in several years developers who know only one thing -- that is coding -- will become extinct. What you need to teach CS students is how to develop valid and correct solutions that can be used by real people and businesses. These solutions must be well designed first; then developed. If I got a cent for every piss poor designed program that I have seen in my life, I'd be Bill Gates :)
Developers solve problems with code; however, just because you have an ability to write a program does not make this program a valid solution! I have noticed that there are too many people with excellent software engineering skills that are simply out of touch with reality and its business side. If your "cool" program does not solve a problem it is absolutely useless in the real business world (the world where you get a pay check for what you do).
Despite being relatively young, I have been employed in the field during all downturns. I managed to survive using only one rule: you must come up with solutions that are valuable for customers who are willing to pay for it. Unfortunately, many of the recent comp. sci. grads do not understand this rule. Instead of focusing on real life and its business needs, they spend their time learning languages without even knowing what these languages are good for. Then they use wrong tools for wrong tasks. My favorite example is my friend who used J2EE to build a site that could have been (and should have been!) done in PHP. He spent half a year on the fucking thing just to realize that a simpler solution could do everything that he wanted!
Then there are people who run into terrible coding problems because their design is flawed. For some odd fucking reason people never think before they start implementing. I use one great rule: software engineering does not provide efficient solutions for some of the problems. Period. Too many people jump into coding without even thinking about the problem. They waste their time on something that can either be done manually with lower cost OR cannot be done at all. The worst thing is that most of these people are afraid of throwing their initial design away and starting from scratch...
With this in mind, here is what I think every comp. sci. student should know:
How to meet business needs with software engineering. How to "read" requirements and come up with solutions that meet them.
How to realize that your design leads to implementation problems and when to throw such a design away.
A well-written program is good. A well-written program that meets customers' needs is better.
How to use a right tool for the right task.
How to become employed and stay employed.
How to use computer science in various aspects of real life. When I am talking about real life, I am talking about something useful that can be actually used by people. I found out that this can be achieved by taking a second minor or getting a second major that is not related to technology.
AC, well said. I wish more people realized the same thing.
Hey, I was in your shoes two years ago. I did switch and... I am still using the system that I bought. Here is what I got:
.
1. PowerMac G4 867MHz.
2. 768MB of RAM.
3. No monitor.
I bought the box from a local retailer, SmallDog Electronics (Vermont) and used my old monitor with it. So far, it has been great. If you do not want to shell out mad cash, get a used system. If I were you, I'd get something with a CPU 1+ MHz and spend extra bucks on memory. I do Java development, surfing and video editing from time to time; no complaints so far.
If you know how to use UNIX (at least the basics) you will find that OS X is very useful because it offers the best of both worlds. Stability is solid
Of course it will be present in most of cameras lenses; however, the effect varies. That's another reason for getting an SLR with a good lens.
Testing a digital camera is not that complicated:
:)
:)
1. Take a picture of a red object against white background.
2. Take a picture of a green object against white background.
3. Find a person with zits/razor cuts on his/her face and take a picture of that person.
Compare these pics to what you see in real life. Chances are that your reds will be off and the person will have a skin with more orange in it. If so, throw your camera away, unless you do not care about these things. If your camera is close to the real world, you're lucky
Here are some other things to try:
1. Take a picture at night. Look for purple fringing. This will determine the quality of your lens. If you have an SLR, you should not be concerned: you can change the lens. If you have a point-and-shoot that produces this result, stay away from night shots
2. If you do not have an SLR, try to test the camera for vingetting (dark corners) and barell effects. This can be done by taking a picture of a grid or something like that.
IT is more than development. When I got out of school in 2003 with a degree in Computer Science I knew that I was not going to become a developer despite good grades, expericence and a positive attitude. I started looking for alternative positions where I could use my knowledge: technical support, system administration, etc. Now I do enterprise technical support and I am fairly satisfied with it.
As job markets evolve, so should our careers. I predict that the U.S. will have less development jobs in the future; however, the IT is not going to go away. We will have more competition and different jobs to compete for :) Let's take a look at B2B support for example: people will have to install and configure complex software, assist high-end architects and developers with integration and maintain networks; there you go. I suspect that soon customer support will become a major issue as software becomes more complex. There will be a market for knowledgeable support techs who can travel around the country and assist in development of custom solutions (that is what my company does already). Then you will have a need for system integrators that will adapt that "imported" software to the needs of U.S. customers . I know many companies that do that already. In the end you'll end up with a less stressful job and more time to code on your own.
And if you miss coding, why do you not invent a cool Open Source project and work on it? Also, you can program on your own if you must do it for personal satisfaction.
Look, no offense to you, but this topic is close to my heart because people in my family deal with people who are disabled and who can use this kind of research. Do you believe that I would not know the difference between the two? I hear about this shit every damn day... If you are not close to somebody who is suffering, you WILL NEVER understand what a possible breakthrough can mean for that person.
For starters, ASCs cannot be diversified. If you take those cells from a brain, you can only re-create neural cells. Then there is an issue with regeneration of damaged tissues: ASCs are not very useful for those purposes. ECSs, unlike ASCs, are easy to grow and they can adapt to different conditions. They have their own shortcomings, but their potential is yet unknown! The reason for not being able to do more experiements is because we do not have many ECS lines around here, in the United States. It costs about $5K per vial of ESCs; therefore, without governments support the research is NOT going anywhere and we will not be able to move forward. We simply cannot stop research because somebody thinks that something is not ethical: religion and science do not mix.
I admit that adult stem cells are useful; however, not going forward with embryonic stem cell research would be an equivalent of stopping Galileo from using a telescope.
You should spend an hour caring for a person with a spinal cord injury. Better, why do you not move in with such a person and live with them for a week or so. How many of you will handle it?
I am not taking this out of my ass; I have actually been around people who cannot move and have no hope of improvement because of their conditions. My best friend has a mild-form of CP; the guy has been suffering all his life because his fucking legs are crooked and there is nothing he can do about it! Do me a favor, look into his eyes and then tell him that you are against stem cell research. Tell him that it sucks to be him because he was born different. Then visit a nursing home and try to take care of patients with Alzheimer's....
I still do not realize why this issue is an issue for our presidential candidates... This is a no brainer that should not be discussed in a country where religion is separate from the state. Then again, just like Kerry I am a liberal guy from Massachusetts :)
I used to work for IBM and work with embedded MontaVista products. Those guys simply rock... I guess Linus does not realize the full potential of what real time functionality can do to Linux :)
I am probably one of the very few Mac users who does not rave about iPods or any other Apple products. I do not know why, but for some freaking reason I do not feel obligated to be a part of the crazy clan of Mac clowns that will sell their first-born for the latest shit-on-a-stick made by Apple. Also, I found it ironic that there are Mac users that blame the rest of the world for being corporate slaves and not thinking outside the box, while taking it up the ass whenever Steve and Co. decide to release yet another overpriced item. That's what makes this "iPod killer" semi-attractive to me.Here is why I would get this player over iPod:
1. I would hate to be a part of this whole damn Apple clan.
2. Simply retarded iPod commercials.
3. Apple featuring kids, who were caught downloading songs, in its commercials.
4. I refuse to shell out big bucks for a product that is going to be outdated (at least by our society's standards) within two months.
Plus, if you take a look at iPod, it is really expensive if you want to have all the damn functionality that can be desired by a vivid music fan. I want that damn FM/AM add-on to be included with the product, an extra battery (w/o the extra price), a belt-clip, a pair of headphones, a couple of cases, a small remote control, etc. If you add all these things up, iPod will be pretty freaking pricy.
Seriously, Google used to be a cool company back in the day. They had a nice search engine, a plain web site without stupid banners and the service worked well. Now the company is different; it acts like a snob on the block and there is nothing oh-so-special about it anymore. Just another fucking corporation for profit. I bet they'll do anything for a quick buck in the nearest future :)
My buddy and I opened the magazine and found the test. We showed it to another friend of ours and then decided to take it collectively. After molesting our brains for about 30 minutes, we called it quits. We are not math wizzes, but all of us have good jobs (one does R&D for U.S. Navy, the other buddy and I do software stuff) and franky speaking, we would not want to work for an environment that treated us like high school kids.
Believe it or not, once I was asked about my SAT score during an interview. I got an offer, but I dropped a ball on that one because I simply did not want to go back to school. I think Google's the same. The bottom line is "Look, not everybody has a Ph.D. in Math; however, there are plenty of smart and hardworking individuals who can benefit a company by strong team work and good attitudes." Notice, I am not saying "Hire everybody else or die!" I am simply stating that there are good and smart individuals who can be productive...