Rereading my post, I see that I said that liberal arts/art classes would be easier to get in to, and that's nonsense on my part. You're 100% correct that the math and physics classes will be much easier as the percentage of individuals capable of taking those classes is quite small; in that respect UCLA is no different from any other university and my statement is incorrect.
It isn't an issue of UCLA being academically more rigorous than your institution; just too many students for you to get enrolled in the classes that you want. And in particular, it pertains to your general education requirements and not your specific major requirements because as you eluded to, who takes high level math and physics classes for fun? When there are 25,500 undergrad students, that's a lot of competition for certain classes...consequently I know of many people who have completed their major classes but are still trying to finish up GE classes. To be fair they could just go down to SMC and finish it up at 1/10th the price... Also I'm aware that both OSU and U of M have more students but unless you live in California you can't begin to understand just how much bureaucracy we deal with...government bungling kicks ass.
And you have no idea just how asinine your final comment is.
Office 2000 was quite annoying, Outlook 2000 in particular. At my company, most users use the dreaded PST to store email as we don't want them leaving gigs of data on the mail server. Well before Outlook 2003, those PST were limited to 2 gigabytes of data and the corruption process would begin at 1.4GB of data. Nothing like having users corrupt their PST's, then having messages get stuck in the outbox and proceed to hammer someone with 300 emails in ten minutes...yeah Outlook 2000, I want to stay on that POS.
That's because you didn't attend UCLA. My sister took five years to get a double major (art and english) at UCLA while being an honor student (which is damn near impossible as an art student). And I would guess liberal art and art classes are easier to get in to. An absurd number of students go to UCLA and getting your classes can be a chore in itself (I remember my sister having to sit by the phone until exactly the moment her registration started just to get a chance at getting the classes required to graduate).
Sorry Mr. Undergrad genius, despite the fact that very few people are capable of doing your major does not mean you know everything. You are wrong here.
Yeah I am also an "IT guy" and I routinely leave the premises with faxes, printers, brand new desktops and 30 inch LCD flat panel monitors and no one ever says a thing...granted I'm leaving to delivery these things to the Chairman's house but just adding my anecdotal experiences...
When someone appearing to a PC guy grabs equipment people don't ask questions.
Don't you worry buddy! Just give it a few more years and you'll have diabetes! Just because a person is able to drive home drunk without causing an accident one night doesn't mean that they won't eventually cause one. Same goes for you, just because you don't have it yet doesn't mean you won't get it. Might take fifty years because of your genes but that's how diabetes works.
My experience was the exact opposite although by the time XP SP2 came out I had ceased most game playing (at least at home, now I just play at work!). I found SP1 to be very unstable and often would end up full of spyware (or maybe that was the p0rn hmmmm).
Aye, XP was terrible at first too but for different reasons. Driver support was non-existent and I remember it being quite vulnerable and buggy but once SP2 came out Windows XP became a fairly usable OS. Vista will go through something quite similar, just going to take some time. This is just some loon yelling "The sky is falling!" As someone else said in another comment, Microsoft might be sunk one day but Vista ain't going to be that iceberg.
Right, they're doing R&D for things down here on earth, like more efficient fuel BUT they arn't going to invest in to the sort of aerospace R&D needed to make this model feasible for them. They'll let universities and Aerospace companies make those breakthroughs and then do the old 3M ('We don't make the XXXX you use, we make it better').
Uh, I can answer this question for you quite easily; the R&D has yet to be done by other companies! Why the heck is a public company, like UPS, going to waste their profits on this sort of R&D when they can let other people do it for them? You won't see UPS and FedEx getting involved with this sort of stuff until someone else bears the heavy burden for the R&D required to make this cost effective.
Yeah, they tried that already and the market responded by not purchasing it. One of those instances were the free market actually corrected the collective stupidity of Movie Execs.
I believe it varies from electric company to electric company because I was under the impression that in Northern California the power company actually pays for your extra wattage but they're very sneaky about it. Even if you're producing extra energy during peak hours, they buy it from you as though you were generating at 2 AM so they can pay you less for it...that's still better than SCE though, and I could be completely misinformed. My family installed one of these systems about a decade ago and things may have changed significantly.
BAH! I say BAH! I had allowed myself to forget about this series until YOU had to bring it up. When is that old battle axe going to finish the next goshdangit book already!?!?
A lot of this crap about being "predisposed" to one field or another is complete hooey to me. We, as in the slashdot community, should pull our collective heads out of asses and STOP applying our own personal experiences to a large subset of people. SOME women are predisposed to IT Jobs just as SOME men are. Gender, I would wager and heavily, has little or nothing to do with it and social norms has a much larger role.
A woman's brain is just as capable of making an IT-Type decision as a man's brain; let's stop pointing to one individual and going "See, she's can't do it therefore no woman can" we just look stupid.
There are a few points throughout your comment that I find unsettling but most of those are merely intuitive responses so rather than getting in to a debate about perspective I'm going to cut right to one of your statements that is completely and utterly nonsense.
# Beautiful people have more daughters: Right, beautiful people have more sex because their self-esteem is high. The first fallacy is that more sex yields specifically more daughters and then you have a false assumption in that beautiful people have more sex due to self-esteem. Let's see some evidence.
Now, there is hard scientific evidence to suggest that two parents who are considered "attractive" or "beautiful" have a child are more likely to have girls than boys.
Here's a washington post article that talks about this occuring: here.
Please, kind sir, support your statements with actual facts; you are currently contradicting many of my history professors from college. I know full well that these individuals are not infallible but they were able to present well thought out arguments and factual evidence to support their claim that the SDI was a huge factor in bankrupting the USSR.
All I see in your post is a claim that it was actually oil, although nothing backing it up and then a rant about how the US is already a police state. Moreover, we're looking at the USSR not the USA thus I'm at a bit of a loss to why that is even in this discussion besides you having another agenda.
It's analogous to saying that a fifteen year old with six months of experience, no tickets, no accidents and driving on a learners permit is a good driver; they haven't been put in nearly enough situations to make this kind of statement. And before you start telling me how OS X is based off of a Unix OS and how secure it is, look at the usage percents on unix/linux.
Now, please don't think I'm trying to say that I'd trust Microsoft over Apple, because I'll trust apple any day of the week in that battle. Anyways, mod me down, mark me as a troll/flamebait...just interjecting some thoughts before we start worshiping at the Altar of Steve Jobs...
Based on that statement, I would assume that you have never worked in a large corp. environment...
Most of microsoft's money comes from corporate license agreement for Server level OS's, Exchange type stuff and the legions and legions of other business productivity software. Moreover, I don't see anything usurping Microsoft's complete and utter domination of the home PC market; as it stands both Mac and Linux are niche user groups.
Besides, in 18 months computer power and vista resource requirements will be a bit more in sync and we'll slowly begin filing off XP on to Vista. At which point Microsoft will announce it's new home OS, which upon release will have the same problems that Vista had, XP had, Windows ME had, Windows 2000 had, Windows 98 had...
There's nothing new here, save Microsoft proclaiming that they're about to save the world...oh wait that's not new and they aren't the only company to resort to this type of marking.(On a side note, am I the only one blown away by the fact that Apple can get a way with saying that the iPhone is a revolutionary devise? The thing costs nearly as much as a laptop and the only "unique" function that I can see is the digital rotary dialing system....).
This isn't an issue of censorship, this isn't an issue of a corporation prohibiting an employee from putting up a blog and who cares about who looks bad. This kid disrupted the school environment for the amusement of himself and his friends and then was stupid enough to post it on YouTube advertising what he did. There's an adage that my father imparted to me while playing sports, "No blood, no foul". Well, this kid was stupid enough to smear the blood all over himself and then walk in front of the ref screaming "look at me, look at me".
Here are the facts as I understand them, and if I've gotten something wrong please tell me: This teacher is a private individual, not a public individual. The content for this video was captured during school hours, in a class. This caused embarrassment to a private individual (teacher) not a public individual (aka a politician/athlete/entertained) The school has not attempted to pull the video down or to censor this "creative kid" beyond his punishment
An argument can be made for excessive punishment but this discussion has not be framed in that light so that seems completely irrelevant to me. The only conclusion I'm left with is some jackass kid got punished for being disruptive; sounds like your average day to me.
How has the school interfered "with the freedoms enshrined by the 1st amendment"? Last I checked, the school has made no effort to censor this material or have it removed from YouTube, which is ALL the first amendment protects.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Personally, I've failed to see the part of the first amendment that protects an individual from the consequences of having that freedom. Just because I can say whatever I want does not mean that I can say whatever I want without consequences. Don Imus was entitled by the First to say what he said about the Rutgers Women's Basketball team but there were severe consequences. Tim Hardaway was protected by the First Amendment when he made homophobic comments regarding John Amaechi coming out of the closet and the consequence has been him being excommunicated from the NBA. We are allowed to say what we want but there MUST ALWAYS be consequences for what we say.
Let's not obfuscate the issue just because we don't like the consequences.
No, this is a school board that is setting an example. If you create and distribute sophomoric, immature content for amusement at the expensive of one of their teachers and that content is created during class hours, there will be grave consequences. Let's not forget that a teacher is a private individual, not a public one. How would you feel if one of your classmates/coworkers were to post a video of you on YouTube that was meant to make you look like a fool for the amusement of others? Doesn't seem all that mind blowing or even uncalled for to me...
You can argue that forty days is too stiff, but that's a completely different discussion.
Exactly, there is no free speech issue here; he had every right to make and publish the film and no one has stopped that but there are consequences for our actions. All in all this should be a very good lesson for him.
I think it's a great idea to switch to these biofuels; it'll enable us to burn through our fossil fuels and put that many more carbon emissions in to the atmosphere that much faster. The only people who want corn based biofuels to take off are the farmers who grow corn and the people who turn that corn in to biofuel...why? The same reason that OPEC controls the amount of oil flowing out of mideast...maximize their profits. The price of corn will go up 4X if biofuels become more pervasive and we'll still have to burn tons of fossil fuels. Sounds pretty stupid to me...
Slashdot Mirror
Rereading my post, I see that I said that liberal arts/art classes would be easier to get in to, and that's nonsense on my part. You're 100% correct that the math and physics classes will be much easier as the percentage of individuals capable of taking those classes is quite small; in that respect UCLA is no different from any other university and my statement is incorrect.
It isn't an issue of UCLA being academically more rigorous than your institution; just too many students for you to get enrolled in the classes that you want. And in particular, it pertains to your general education requirements and not your specific major requirements because as you eluded to, who takes high level math and physics classes for fun? When there are 25,500 undergrad students, that's a lot of competition for certain classes...consequently I know of many people who have completed their major classes but are still trying to finish up GE classes. To be fair they could just go down to SMC and finish it up at 1/10th the price... Also I'm aware that both OSU and U of M have more students but unless you live in California you can't begin to understand just how much bureaucracy we deal with...government bungling kicks ass.
And you have no idea just how asinine your final comment is.
Office 2000 was quite annoying, Outlook 2000 in particular. At my company, most users use the dreaded PST to store email as we don't want them leaving gigs of data on the mail server. Well before Outlook 2003, those PST were limited to 2 gigabytes of data and the corruption process would begin at 1.4GB of data. Nothing like having users corrupt their PST's, then having messages get stuck in the outbox and proceed to hammer someone with 300 emails in ten minutes...yeah Outlook 2000, I want to stay on that POS.
That's because you didn't attend UCLA. My sister took five years to get a double major (art and english) at UCLA while being an honor student (which is damn near impossible as an art student). And I would guess liberal art and art classes are easier to get in to. An absurd number of students go to UCLA and getting your classes can be a chore in itself (I remember my sister having to sit by the phone until exactly the moment her registration started just to get a chance at getting the classes required to graduate).
Sorry Mr. Undergrad genius, despite the fact that very few people are capable of doing your major does not mean you know everything. You are wrong here.
Hmmm that sort of sounds like the MPAA and the RIAA to me....
Yeah I am also an "IT guy" and I routinely leave the premises with faxes, printers, brand new desktops and 30 inch LCD flat panel monitors and no one ever says a thing...granted I'm leaving to delivery these things to the Chairman's house but just adding my anecdotal experiences...
When someone appearing to a PC guy grabs equipment people don't ask questions.
Don't you worry buddy! Just give it a few more years and you'll have diabetes! Just because a person is able to drive home drunk without causing an accident one night doesn't mean that they won't eventually cause one. Same goes for you, just because you don't have it yet doesn't mean you won't get it. Might take fifty years because of your genes but that's how diabetes works.
My experience was the exact opposite although by the time XP SP2 came out I had ceased most game playing (at least at home, now I just play at work!). I found SP1 to be very unstable and often would end up full of spyware (or maybe that was the p0rn hmmmm).
Aye, XP was terrible at first too but for different reasons. Driver support was non-existent and I remember it being quite vulnerable and buggy but once SP2 came out Windows XP became a fairly usable OS. Vista will go through something quite similar, just going to take some time. This is just some loon yelling "The sky is falling!" As someone else said in another comment, Microsoft might be sunk one day but Vista ain't going to be that iceberg.
Right, they're doing R&D for things down here on earth, like more efficient fuel BUT they arn't going to invest in to the sort of aerospace R&D needed to make this model feasible for them. They'll let universities and Aerospace companies make those breakthroughs and then do the old 3M ('We don't make the XXXX you use, we make it better').
Uh, I can answer this question for you quite easily; the R&D has yet to be done by other companies! Why the heck is a public company, like UPS, going to waste their profits on this sort of R&D when they can let other people do it for them? You won't see UPS and FedEx getting involved with this sort of stuff until someone else bears the heavy burden for the R&D required to make this cost effective.
Yeah, they tried that already and the market responded by not purchasing it. One of those instances were the free market actually corrected the collective stupidity of Movie Execs.
I believe it varies from electric company to electric company because I was under the impression that in Northern California the power company actually pays for your extra wattage but they're very sneaky about it. Even if you're producing extra energy during peak hours, they buy it from you as though you were generating at 2 AM so they can pay you less for it...that's still better than SCE though, and I could be completely misinformed. My family installed one of these systems about a decade ago and things may have changed significantly.
Well I don't know about you guys but my local illegal arms dealer takes paypal, so mommy's credit card here I come!
BAH! I say BAH! I had allowed myself to forget about this series until YOU had to bring it up. When is that old battle axe going to finish the next goshdangit book already!?!?
A lot of this crap about being "predisposed" to one field or another is complete hooey to me. We, as in the slashdot community, should pull our collective heads out of asses and STOP applying our own personal experiences to a large subset of people. SOME women are predisposed to IT Jobs just as SOME men are. Gender, I would wager and heavily, has little or nothing to do with it and social norms has a much larger role.
A woman's brain is just as capable of making an IT-Type decision as a man's brain; let's stop pointing to one individual and going "See, she's can't do it therefore no woman can" we just look stupid.
Now, there is hard scientific evidence to suggest that two parents who are considered "attractive" or "beautiful" have a child are more likely to have girls than boys.
Here's a washington post article that talks about this occuring: here.
Please, kind sir, support your statements with actual facts; you are currently contradicting many of my history professors from college. I know full well that these individuals are not infallible but they were able to present well thought out arguments and factual evidence to support their claim that the SDI was a huge factor in bankrupting the USSR.
All I see in your post is a claim that it was actually oil, although nothing backing it up and then a rant about how the US is already a police state. Moreover, we're looking at the USSR not the USA thus I'm at a bit of a loss to why that is even in this discussion besides you having another agenda.
Well, I think it's time to put some flame retardant clothing on because I'm about to get all sac religious up in this post....
Although Apple does not have a bad track record, I would not argue that they have a good track record on security and here's why...
Appple's user base is incredibly small: according to a random blog 'Mac Intel OS usage is growing quickly, and currently has 0.62 percent usage market share, but overall Mac OS usage is slightly down.. Back in December 2005 total Mac OS usage market share was 4.35 percent, but August 2006 numbers show total Mac OS market share down to 4.33 percent.' The consequence of this limited user base is less people have less interest in actually finding the vulnerabilities that may or may not exist in the OS. I mean if I'm attempting to take control of another persons computer, I'm going to put my time in to the OS that has the most users not a niche user group (which Apple is).
It's analogous to saying that a fifteen year old with six months of experience, no tickets, no accidents and driving on a learners permit is a good driver; they haven't been put in nearly enough situations to make this kind of statement. And before you start telling me how OS X is based off of a Unix OS and how secure it is, look at the usage percents on unix/linux.
Now, please don't think I'm trying to say that I'd trust Microsoft over Apple, because I'll trust apple any day of the week in that battle. Anyways, mod me down, mark me as a troll/flamebait...just interjecting some thoughts before we start worshiping at the Altar of Steve Jobs...
"This is the beginning of the end for microsoft"
Based on that statement, I would assume that you have never worked in a large corp. environment...
Most of microsoft's money comes from corporate license agreement for Server level OS's, Exchange type stuff and the legions and legions of other business productivity software. Moreover, I don't see anything usurping Microsoft's complete and utter domination of the home PC market; as it stands both Mac and Linux are niche user groups.
Besides, in 18 months computer power and vista resource requirements will be a bit more in sync and we'll slowly begin filing off XP on to Vista. At which point Microsoft will announce it's new home OS, which upon release will have the same problems that Vista had, XP had, Windows ME had, Windows 2000 had, Windows 98 had...
There's nothing new here, save Microsoft proclaiming that they're about to save the world...oh wait that's not new and they aren't the only company to resort to this type of marking.(On a side note, am I the only one blown away by the fact that Apple can get a way with saying that the iPhone is a revolutionary devise? The thing costs nearly as much as a laptop and the only "unique" function that I can see is the digital rotary dialing system....).
This isn't an issue of censorship, this isn't an issue of a corporation prohibiting an employee from putting up a blog and who cares about who looks bad. This kid disrupted the school environment for the amusement of himself and his friends and then was stupid enough to post it on YouTube advertising what he did. There's an adage that my father imparted to me while playing sports, "No blood, no foul". Well, this kid was stupid enough to smear the blood all over himself and then walk in front of the ref screaming "look at me, look at me".
Here are the facts as I understand them, and if I've gotten something wrong please tell me:
This teacher is a private individual, not a public individual.
The content for this video was captured during school hours, in a class.
This caused embarrassment to a private individual (teacher) not a public individual (aka a politician/athlete/entertained)
The school has not attempted to pull the video down or to censor this "creative kid" beyond his punishment
An argument can be made for excessive punishment but this discussion has not be framed in that light so that seems completely irrelevant to me. The only conclusion I'm left with is some jackass kid got punished for being disruptive; sounds like your average day to me.
Let's not obfuscate the issue just because we don't like the consequences.
No, this is a school board that is setting an example. If you create and distribute sophomoric, immature content for amusement at the expensive of one of their teachers and that content is created during class hours, there will be grave consequences. Let's not forget that a teacher is a private individual, not a public one. How would you feel if one of your classmates/coworkers were to post a video of you on YouTube that was meant to make you look like a fool for the amusement of others? Doesn't seem all that mind blowing or even uncalled for to me...
You can argue that forty days is too stiff, but that's a completely different discussion.
Exactly, there is no free speech issue here; he had every right to make and publish the film and no one has stopped that but there are consequences for our actions. All in all this should be a very good lesson for him.
I think it's a great idea to switch to these biofuels; it'll enable us to burn through our fossil fuels and put that many more carbon emissions in to the atmosphere that much faster. The only people who want corn based biofuels to take off are the farmers who grow corn and the people who turn that corn in to biofuel...why? The same reason that OPEC controls the amount of oil flowing out of mideast...maximize their profits. The price of corn will go up 4X if biofuels become more pervasive and we'll still have to burn tons of fossil fuels. Sounds pretty stupid to me...