*sigh*.. Ok. One of the differences is that some of the facilities bearing the ads are only there because of the ads. The serenity of the park might be spoiled by an ad-bearing bench, but without the ad there might not even be a bench, or if there was you might have paid for it with tax dollars or worse, and admission fee to the park. These things don't grow on trees. Someone has to pay for them, and if Nike will do that in exchange for having there logo on the bench, fine. At least I have somewhere to sit when my feet get tired. Same goes for ads on public transit. Ads are just one way of paying the high costs of public transit in order to make it affordable to the general public. So, not all ads are bad. I do however, cringe at the ads in public washrooms... but if the removal of the ads means no place to crap, well... I guess I can live with it.
I think the most important section of that whole document is 7.3, which I lovingly think of as the "condom section" - common sense steps to protecting yourself when you're in a relationship with a beast. Face it - for whatever reasons, many IT managers are loathe to leave the Microsoft cradle and make the jump to OSS. But 7.3 is practical common-sense advice about how not to dig a bigger hole than one you're in.
Water will flow as long as pressure is applied to force the water through the microchannels. Don't think so much about how to get the water-flowing, think more about how to tap into source of everyday occuring pressures: A squeezable cell-phone, or a calculator whose buttons activate a micro-pump.
On the other hand the efficiencies reported so far seem pretty damn low so your squeezable cell-phone would only be used by a pro-wrestler, and the calculator would have to be pretty durable to withstand the stresses of being hammered on.
Sort of reminds me of a really bad movie some years ago that takes place in the near future in which one of the problems plaguing society is mental illness caused by the over-abundance of electronic signals in the air waves. Except instead of parents suing schools, it involved some action hero butt-kicking.
Well.. my productivity just took a nose dive because now I'll be spending the rest of my day trying to remember the name of that damn movie. Unless someone here knows what I'm talking about?
I don't think they're trying to control this thing in the "long term". Spam is a get rich quick scheme for those with the means and lack of scruples. Even if spam got outlawed around the world by noon tomorrow, those 150 will have made their money and that's all they want: to milk idiots for as long as they can before the doors slam shut.. and the doors WILL eventually slam shut.
I mean, is it? 61% doesn't sound like a dismal failure to me at all. That's 61 times out of a 100 that the system recognized a face in a crowd using a technology still in its infancy. Not that I really like the idea of this thing, but it just seems a little premature to pull the plug or dismiss an idea when it's appears to be working well over half the time. It's not like this thing is being used to fly passenger aircraft (in which case, yeah.. 61% success rate is pretty scary).
1. It's already hard enough to "scroll" the damn things vertically without accidently "pressing" it and thats using fingers with knuckles that are the result millions of years of evolution to facilitate such tasks.
2. This will encourage even more of those foul evil UI-nightmare horizontal scrollbars. And as I have a policy of not buying MS products that means my fingers will ache.
I really hope Taylor is serious and I really hope that Microsoft does produce some REAL facts easily backed up and replicated which do indeed show some areas of superiority over OS for their products.
Then all the anit-MS bigots (and I am one of them) and OS-developers will have a worthy goal to shoot for - something concrete to "improve" upon - rather than just bemoaning Microsoft's evils.
And perhaps in the meantime I will be soothed to learn that Windows ME isn't the pile of shit I've come to think of it as. It will still crash on me every single day without exception, sometimes during shutdown, but at least I will rest comfort knowing that it brings the computer to a grinding halt with a regularity I can set my watch by.
Unless applying for the position of Elf-Klingon disputes arbitrator to settle territorial rights over the embattled convention centre main floor. In which case you won't get the Job cause it's "ELVISH", not elfin.
counter-counter-lawsuit... Reminds me of the that Mark Wahlberg movie...
D. McBride: Gah! RH is on to us! They must be using a scam-buster. No worry. We'll just bring out the ol' scam-buster-buster and hope to hell they don't have a scam-buster-buster-buster. Maybe we should get our lawyers working on a scam-buster-buster-buster-buster just in case.
The *problem* with this is that a lot of people don't trust auto-update and not without good reason. The last time I allowed autoupdate to patch my system it "broke" several applications. One of those broken apps was the install manager used by Sun's Java distributions. surprise surprise.
Unfortunately, another problem - and this is one I have where I work - we have NO direct connection to the internet meaning we can't apply these patches. Our internet services are provided via Citrix sessions to our ISP. Too complicated to try to explain here. But anyway, you might think this means we're not vulnerable. HA. Think again! Some joker with a laptop can still get his machine infected elsewhere and then come in to work the next day, plug into our LAN, and presto! Big problems and no easy way to patch. And to boot, we laid off our only sysadmin because the department manager figured we didn't need him anymore because Ta-da! Our servers were all taken care of by our ISP now.. You have to ask yourself now, "Who takes care of all those workstation". NOBODY! That's who.
Cheer up. You're not the only one noticing this trend. Personally I feel it's only a handful of BIG (seriously.. BIG) high-profile companies that are reducing costs by moving IT services overseas. But it NOT every shop doing so. Granted there's a lot of unemployed people out there but there's also still a lot of jobs. One has to wonder if the real reasons there's so many complaints about lack of work is more because of one or more of the following: 1) Unwilling to relocate. 2) Inflated egos spoiled by dot.com era salaries. 3) Realization that MS Certification and/or 6-month diploma is NOT a meal ticket. (Note to readers: If you're unemployed and one of these, leave the real work to the pros, go run a convenience store or become a plumber instead) 4) Not informed enough to go looking in the right places. 5) Anti-social personalities.
Methinks Slashdot could "help out" its unemployed readers by providing links to a) IT/software developer job-wanted sites. b) sites to help one improve personality/hygiene and general interview skills.
There are already plenty of site like that but apparently a LOT of readers can't find them on their own.
Oh wait... lookee here in the corner under "Services".. Wow.. it's a "Jobs" link.
Instead of posting every single security flaw in windows to slashdot (I mean seriously... we KNOW they exist don't we? It's not exactly "news" and there ARE other sites for them) to be flamed to pieces how about just have a little "counter" somewhere on the main page.. along with a date the user can set in his/her settings. Increment it everytime a new flaw is found so that it keeps a running tally. Number of Windows flaws since . Fun AND informative. Sorta.
Fast food robots would be nice if that means I will finally get what I asked for at the drive through window.
Seriously, I'm beginning to think it's a big joke for these drive-through window bastards. Last 5 times through, no kidding, order was screwed up everytime. Worst incident: I ordered a Sausage and egg McMuffin and guess what I got... A sausage patty! Fsckers. The order was even placed face-to-face, not through a lousy intercom.
So yeah, robots would be REAL nice. Now, I just hope they don't build robots that can write software, then I'M hooped. Oh wait.. 2050.. I'll be dead by then anyway.
No problem! It will offset the matter we bring back to earth once mining colonies on the Moon and Mars are established. Hell... there is even great trade potential here. We ship garbage to moon, moon send valuable ore to earth. As long as the traded mass is relatively then both systems will remain stable... Newtonianly speaking...
Dear Mr Pira... er vict... er whatever.. We would like inform you that you have been chosen to be bent over a table and raped repeatedly in, not 15, no sireee... but 30 days!
We realize this may be an inopportune time for you (cause we plan things that way), but Honey.. we needs the sugar!
Please be waiting with pants around ankles. Thank you.
Forget knee-jerk reactions for a second and focus on the "economics" of this decision...
Since the dot.com bust aren't there a LOT of unemployed software developers in the U.S.? (read: job market saturated). Shouldn't that mean that U.S. corporations have the leverage to pick and choose? (read: keep salaries low) So given that U.S. should "theoretically" have an abundance of cheap labour what is the real incentive of outsourcing to India? Do they work for dirt there?
My understanding was that Indian tech firms were actually fairly high quality and given the number of IT "schools" in north america that churn out underqualified barely-trained can't-think-forthemselves "developers" I suspect that quality may also be an issue that IBM is looking at.
If that's not the case, then perhaps the whole notion of thousands of unemployed dot-commers is a myth. Given that many were churned out by fly-by-night tech schools I suspect they sunk back into the woodwork to leave real development to professionals. Which leads to my next point: If IBM is moving jobs overseas to save in labour costs then that wouldn't that indicate labour costs here are high? Would that not in turn indicate a "shortage" of qualified developers. So if all these IBM employees get laid off, would they not be able to simply fill the shortage here but with other companies (that don't have IBM's resources to move operations abroad so easily)?
At any rate, corporations are not charities. They don't "owe" jobs to anybody just because you live in a certain country or don't. Corporations have a mandate to minimize costs and increase profitability - and in so doing, at least in theory, they contribute to making their host country all that much healithier economically. So in this respect IBM's move can be viewed as "ultimately" good for both the U.S. AND India even if it is painful in the short term for the individuals laid off.
The slashdot blurb talks about anonymous payments... Lots of comments in this thread talk about anonymous payments whether how it would work or whether the gov't would cry foul, etc...
A search on the article itself does NOT have the word "anonymous" anywhere in it.
So... given that the article is very short on implementation details, how does one come to the conclusion there is anything anonymous about it? Because no credit card is involved? Not saying it isn't... but it just seems there's a big jump to conclusions.. unless I'm blind.
Not really. Prior to the ruling, a Telco could refuse ADSL to a customer if that customer was not also buying local phone service from same Telco. This is where the discrimination comes from and where the parent post is wrong. There is no "favouring" going on here. Favouring implies that the customer can still choose the telco independantly of the ADSL service and just that the terms will be better if you get the ADSL and phone service from the same provider. That is NOT what was happening. You got NO ADSL service if you used a different phone provider (or more to the point if you have NO local phone service).
The reason this increases competition is because there is little if any competition (despite what the industry might say) in the local phone service and consequently tying ADSL to local phone provider meant likewise no competition there as well. The discrimination, therefore, is not so much against competing business (again, because there isn't much competition) so much as it discriminates against those "customers" who *horror-of-horrors* don't have local phone service (which is increasingly common as more and more people move to cellular phones).
So the ruling talks about providing ADSL service to competitors lines but what it really boils down to is a Telco can't force a customer to buy their (probably unnecessary) phone service just to get the ADSL, (just like a cable internet provider can't force you to buy the TV package). However, it does not prevent the Telco from adding a surcharge for providing ADSL sans phone which is similar to what the cable providers do if you buy the internet access without the TV package. Now... if they could only regulate THAT away we'd be really laughin.
Re:Guess I won't worry until the BSA kicks in my d
on
Freenet 0.5.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
I don't think it's as much of a problem with Software though, quite frankly. The problem with mp3's is A) they're small, B) The full CD is expensive and comes with 90% crap, and C)Very few CD's have anything else that make them an attractive buy.
Software is A) A lot larger B) Generally is either all bad (you ain't gonna play it if you don't like the whole thing) or all good (typically you'll feel bad if you don't pay for it)and C) LOT's of value added goodies for legit owners including access to web-sites for mods/upgrades, etc..
Now I don't feel bad about pirating music. Ok.. it has to be said.. my love for the artists do not outway my utter contempt for the industry in general and I refuse to buy a music CD at any price. But I only listen to music that's been dead for 20 years anyway...;) Software is different. Most games I play I've tried as pirated version first (because of point B above) and if I like it enough to play it through, I buy it. I register it. And I take full advantage of all the value-added extras that come with a fully paid for and registered product.
I don't lose sleep over listening to pirated 70's-80's music. I DO feel bad about not paying for a good game though.
Re:Why you should generally hire young coders
on
Head First Java
·
· Score: 1
Actually, I have doubts about the truth to this. I've heard it said a lot, but I never actually seen it in practice and I'm not exactly a skinny pimply teenager anymore. Anybody and their dog can make the claim of knowing 200+ programming languages and able to learn more real fast. That doesn't catch anyone's eye. Young programmer's might be preferred by some operations because they are CHEAPER! But willing to try new things? I seriously doubt that. Younger also means less experience with any one thing.. and as I said, just about anybody in this industry (and certianly the types that read slashdot) can make the claim of knowing a lot and able to learn more regardless of their age. What makes someone an attractive hire for a serious employer is specific knowledge of specific toolsets. Mind yo, I can only speak for the IT industry. Most IT shops and the like don't have every programming tool at their disposal or are reluctant to bring in extra tools even if free because of training/research costs. It's usually a significant investment in a small set of technologies and ideally they want people who already knows those tools (= lower training costs or downtime for familiarization). That's why in the IT world you often see really obscure job requirements or 2+ years of experience in tools that came out only in the last month.
Slashdot Mirror
*sigh*.. Ok. One of the differences is that some of the facilities bearing the ads are only there because of the ads. The serenity of the park might be spoiled by an ad-bearing bench, but without the ad there might not even be a bench, or if there was you might have paid for it with tax dollars or worse, and admission fee to the park. These things don't grow on trees. Someone has to pay for them, and if Nike will do that in exchange for having there logo on the bench, fine. At least I have somewhere to sit when my feet get tired. Same goes for ads on public transit. Ads are just one way of paying the high costs of public transit in order to make it affordable to the general public. So, not all ads are bad. I do however, cringe at the ads in public washrooms... but if the removal of the ads means no place to crap, well... I guess I can live with it.
I think the most important section of that whole document is 7.3, which I lovingly think of as the "condom section" - common sense steps to protecting yourself when you're in a relationship with a beast. Face it - for whatever reasons, many IT managers are loathe to leave the Microsoft cradle and make the jump to OSS. But 7.3 is practical common-sense advice about how not to dig a bigger hole than one you're in.
Water will flow as long as pressure is applied to force the water through the microchannels. Don't think so much about how to get the water-flowing, think more about how to tap into source of everyday occuring pressures: A squeezable cell-phone, or a calculator whose buttons activate a micro-pump.
On the other hand the efficiencies reported so far seem pretty damn low so your squeezable cell-phone would only be used by a pro-wrestler, and the calculator would have to be pretty durable to withstand the stresses of being hammered on.
Sort of reminds me of a really bad movie some years ago that takes place in the near future in which one of the problems plaguing society is mental illness caused by the over-abundance of electronic signals in the air waves.
Except instead of parents suing schools, it involved some action hero butt-kicking.
Well.. my productivity just took a nose dive because now I'll be spending the rest of my day trying to remember the name of that damn movie. Unless someone here knows what I'm talking about?
I don't think they're trying to control this thing in the "long term". Spam is a get rich quick scheme for those with the means and lack of scruples. Even if spam got outlawed around the world by noon tomorrow, those 150 will have made their money and that's all they want: to milk idiots for as long as they can before the doors slam shut.. and the doors WILL eventually slam shut.
I mean, is it? 61% doesn't sound like a dismal failure to me at all. That's 61 times out of a 100 that the system recognized a face in a crowd using a technology still in its infancy. Not that I really like the idea of this thing, but it just seems a little premature to pull the plug or dismiss an idea when it's appears to be working well over half the time. It's not like this thing is being used to fly passenger aircraft (in which case, yeah.. 61% success rate is pretty scary).
But it seems in this corrupt world, anything innocent and beautiful will eventally be raped by those who have nothing to do but distroy purity.
In soviet russia, purity destroy you!
Yes. Let's turn slashdot into a rumour-mill.
Oh wait...
I have two complaints about this:
1. It's already hard enough to "scroll" the damn things vertically without accidently "pressing" it and thats using fingers with knuckles that are the result millions of years of evolution to facilitate such tasks.
2. This will encourage even more of those foul evil UI-nightmare horizontal scrollbars. And as I have a policy of not buying MS products that means my fingers will ache.
I really hope Taylor is serious and I really hope that Microsoft does produce some REAL facts easily backed up and replicated which do indeed show some areas of superiority over OS for their products.
Then all the anit-MS bigots (and I am one of them) and OS-developers will have a worthy goal to shoot for - something concrete to "improve" upon - rather than just bemoaning Microsoft's evils.
And perhaps in the meantime I will be soothed to learn that Windows ME isn't the pile of shit I've come to think of it as. It will still crash on me every single day without exception, sometimes during shutdown, but at least I will rest comfort knowing that it brings the computer to a grinding halt with a regularity I can set my watch by.
Unless applying for the position of Elf-Klingon disputes arbitrator to settle territorial rights over the embattled convention centre main floor.
In which case you won't get the Job cause it's "ELVISH", not elfin.
counter-counter-lawsuit... Reminds me of the that Mark Wahlberg movie...
D. McBride: Gah! RH is on to us! They must be using a scam-buster. No worry. We'll just bring out the ol' scam-buster-buster and hope to hell they don't have a scam-buster-buster-buster. Maybe we should get our lawyers working on a scam-buster-buster-buster-buster just in case.
The *problem* with this is that a lot of people don't trust auto-update and not without good reason. The last time I allowed autoupdate to patch my system it "broke" several applications. One of those broken apps was the install manager used by Sun's Java distributions. surprise surprise.
Unfortunately, another problem - and this is one I have where I work - we have NO direct connection to the internet meaning we can't apply these patches. Our internet services are provided via Citrix sessions to our ISP. Too complicated to try to explain here. But anyway, you might think this means we're not vulnerable. HA. Think again! Some joker with a laptop can still get his machine infected elsewhere and then come in to work the next day, plug into our LAN, and presto! Big problems and no easy way to patch. And to boot, we laid off our only sysadmin because the department manager figured we didn't need him anymore because Ta-da! Our servers were all taken care of by our ISP now.. You have to ask yourself now, "Who takes care of all those workstation".
NOBODY! That's who.
We're doomed.
But... WHAT single women? You not only read slashdot... you POST!
Cheer up. You're not the only one noticing this trend. Personally I feel it's only a handful of BIG (seriously.. BIG) high-profile companies that are reducing costs by moving IT services overseas. But it NOT every shop doing so. Granted there's a lot of unemployed people out there but there's also still a lot of jobs. One has to wonder if the real reasons there's so many complaints about lack of work is more because of one or more of the following:
1) Unwilling to relocate.
2) Inflated egos spoiled by dot.com era salaries.
3) Realization that MS Certification and/or 6-month diploma is NOT a meal ticket. (Note to readers: If you're unemployed and one of these, leave the real work to the pros, go run a convenience store or become a plumber instead)
4) Not informed enough to go looking in the right places.
5) Anti-social personalities.
Methinks Slashdot could "help out" its unemployed readers by providing links to
a) IT/software developer job-wanted sites.
b) sites to help one improve personality/hygiene and general interview skills.
There are already plenty of site like that but apparently a LOT of readers can't find them on their own.
Oh wait... lookee here in the corner under "Services".. Wow.. it's a "Jobs" link.
Now if only there was link to this page.
Instead of posting every single security flaw in windows to slashdot (I mean seriously... we KNOW they exist don't we? It's not exactly "news" and there ARE other sites for them) to be flamed to pieces how about just have a little "counter" somewhere on the main page.. along with a date the user can set in his/her settings. Increment it everytime a new flaw is found so that it keeps a running tally. Number of Windows flaws since . Fun AND informative. Sorta.
Fast food robots would be nice if that means I will finally get what I asked for at the drive through window.
Seriously, I'm beginning to think it's a big joke for these drive-through window bastards. Last 5 times through, no kidding, order was screwed up everytime. Worst incident: I ordered a Sausage and egg McMuffin and guess what I got... A sausage patty! Fsckers. The order was even placed face-to-face, not through a lousy intercom.
So yeah, robots would be REAL nice. Now, I just hope they don't build robots that can write software, then I'M hooped. Oh wait.. 2050.. I'll be dead by then anyway.
No problem! It will offset the matter we bring back to earth once mining colonies on the Moon and Mars are established. Hell... there is even great trade potential here. We ship garbage to moon, moon send valuable ore to earth. As long as the traded mass is relatively then both systems will remain stable... Newtonianly speaking...
Dear Mr Pira... er vict... er whatever..
We would like inform you that you have been chosen to be bent over a table and raped repeatedly in, not 15, no sireee... but 30 days!
We realize this may be an inopportune time for you (cause we plan things that way), but Honey.. we needs the sugar!
Please be waiting with pants around ankles. Thank you.
Your sincerely,
B. Gates.
Forget knee-jerk reactions for a second and focus on the "economics" of this decision...
Since the dot.com bust aren't there a LOT of unemployed software developers in the U.S.? (read: job market saturated). Shouldn't that mean that U.S. corporations have the leverage to pick and choose? (read: keep salaries low) So given that U.S. should "theoretically" have an abundance of cheap labour what is the real incentive of outsourcing to India? Do they work for dirt there?
My understanding was that Indian tech firms were actually fairly high quality and given the number of IT "schools" in north america that churn out underqualified barely-trained can't-think-forthemselves "developers" I suspect that quality may also be an issue that IBM is looking at.
If that's not the case, then perhaps the whole notion of thousands of unemployed dot-commers is a myth. Given that many were churned out by fly-by-night tech schools I suspect they sunk back into the woodwork to leave real development to professionals. Which leads to my next point: If IBM is moving jobs overseas to save in labour costs then that wouldn't that indicate labour costs here are high? Would that not in turn indicate a "shortage" of qualified developers. So if all these IBM employees get laid off, would they not be able to simply fill the shortage here but with other companies (that don't have IBM's resources to move operations abroad so easily)?
At any rate, corporations are not charities. They don't "owe" jobs to anybody just because you live in a certain country or don't. Corporations have a mandate to minimize costs and increase profitability - and in so doing, at least in theory, they contribute to making their host country all that much healithier economically. So in this respect IBM's move can be viewed as "ultimately" good for both the U.S. AND India even if it is painful in the short term for the individuals laid off.
My favourite printer is the one at work. ;)
The slashdot blurb talks about anonymous payments... Lots of comments in this thread talk about anonymous payments whether how it would work or whether the gov't would cry foul, etc...
A search on the article itself does NOT have the word "anonymous" anywhere in it.
So... given that the article is very short on implementation details, how does one come to the conclusion there is anything anonymous about it? Because no credit card is involved? Not saying it isn't... but it just seems there's a big jump to conclusions.. unless I'm blind.
Not really. Prior to the ruling, a Telco could refuse ADSL to a customer if that customer was not also buying local phone service from same Telco. This is where the discrimination comes from and where the parent post is wrong. There is no "favouring" going on here. Favouring implies that the customer can still choose the telco independantly of the ADSL service and just that the terms will be better if you get the ADSL and phone service from the same provider. That is NOT what was happening. You got NO ADSL service if you used a different phone provider (or more to the point if you have NO local phone service).
The reason this increases competition is because there is little if any competition (despite what the industry might say) in the local phone service and consequently tying ADSL to local phone provider meant likewise no competition there as well. The discrimination, therefore, is not so much against competing business (again, because there isn't much competition) so much as it discriminates against those "customers" who *horror-of-horrors* don't have local phone service (which is increasingly common as more and more people move to cellular phones).
So the ruling talks about providing ADSL service to competitors lines but what it really boils down to is a Telco can't force a customer to buy their (probably unnecessary) phone service just to get the ADSL, (just like a cable internet provider can't force you to buy the TV package). However, it does not prevent the Telco from adding a surcharge for providing ADSL sans phone which is similar to what the cable providers do if you buy the internet access without the TV package. Now... if they could only regulate THAT away we'd be really laughin.
I don't think it's as much of a problem with Software though, quite frankly. The problem with mp3's is A) they're small, B) The full CD is expensive and comes with 90% crap, and C)Very few CD's have anything else that make them an attractive buy.
;) Software is different. Most games I play I've tried as pirated version first (because of point B above) and if I like it enough to play it through, I buy it. I register it. And I take full advantage of all the value-added extras that come with a fully paid for and registered product.
Software is A) A lot larger B) Generally is either all bad (you ain't gonna play it if you don't like the whole thing) or all good (typically you'll feel bad if you don't pay for it)and C) LOT's of value added goodies for legit owners including access to web-sites for mods/upgrades, etc..
Now I don't feel bad about pirating music. Ok.. it has to be said.. my love for the artists do not outway my utter contempt for the industry in general and I refuse to buy a music CD at any price. But I only listen to music that's been dead for 20 years anyway...
I don't lose sleep over listening to pirated 70's-80's music. I DO feel bad about not paying for a good game though.
Actually, I have doubts about the truth to this. I've heard it said a lot, but I never actually seen it in practice and I'm not exactly a skinny pimply teenager anymore. Anybody and their dog can make the claim of knowing 200+ programming languages and able to learn more real fast. That doesn't catch anyone's eye. Young programmer's might be preferred by some operations because they are CHEAPER! But willing to try new things? I seriously doubt that. Younger also means less experience with any one thing.. and as I said, just about anybody in this industry (and certianly the types that read slashdot) can make the claim of knowing a lot and able to learn more regardless of their age. What makes someone an attractive hire for a serious employer is specific knowledge of specific toolsets. Mind yo, I can only speak for the IT industry. Most IT shops and the like don't have every programming tool at their disposal or are reluctant to bring in extra tools even if free because of training/research costs. It's usually a significant investment in a small set of technologies and ideally they want people who already knows those tools (= lower training costs or downtime for familiarization). That's why in the IT world you often see really obscure job requirements or 2+ years of experience in tools that came out only in the last month.