Because preventing a 50K ton tank of water from leaking is probably much easier and requires less material than preventing 50K tons of plutonium from radiating around?
Your post doesn't take into account the nature of what is stored. You do not need layers of lead or concrete to store water. With plutonium, you do.
I wouldn't be surprised you don't get *that* much applications. The way you seem to treat applicants reads like you're not a company to work for. Most of my job applications in the past have never got a response.
Aside from being rather impolite in my view (do you not answer when someone asks if they can buy your product and you can't sell them for whatever reason?), you probably don't even try to take the seat of the applicant and his/her expectations. Not receiving an answer is annoying since you need to plan/schedule taking into account yet one more "unknown" factor. It's also disappointing when one makes an effort to write, apply, talk to people, to just be ignored.
If you get as far as interview, it's nice to know why you didn't succeed but you shouldn't expect it. Actually, you'll find out at your next interview as an applicant that it doesn't really matter. Since all the interview process is just a diplomatic relationship dance, while one finds it is a failed interview, another can think otherwise. YES or NO however is what matters to you and your applicant.
just maybe you could be liable.
That's sheer paranoia. Unless you've made your choice obviously arbitrary and you shown illegal behaviour in that matter, do you think ANYONE who applies for a job would sue you because he didn't get the job? The only thing I can think about is you being liable for spreading more FUD.
The applicant and the interviewer have obligations regarding each other, but more than that, both can learn from each other exchange. Don't forget that interviews are ways to get to know each other before life-changing decisions are made. Both sides have to make an effort.
Also, you seem to consider that you're making a favor by interviewing someone. You're not. At the crudest, you need someone that will help you generate more revenue in one way or the other. And yes, you owe explanations on your decisions, to all parties involved. Someone made an effort to meet and speak with you, you should make an effort to welcome them.
Why not pick a linux distro that supports KDE, Gnome, and others, so that the user can make their own decision.
I think you're missing the point. It's all about not providing users with options they cannot choose from because they have no idea what you're talking about (ask my gran'ma what KDE or Gnome is, she'll stare at you as if you're a mad man, although she can make her way through an UI such as the one on top of OS X). Let alone the fact that one will have a hard time understanding the difference or why there is one, average users won't even know how to select one or the other. That's what the article is about. Too much features kill the features.
I definitely agree with you. I don't like this idea. I find it dangerously anti-freedom.
Then, I also do not like this 21th century moral trend to overprotect the children of any single thing, dismissing parental authority completely in the process, and goes against the wrong targets. As the post suggested, as long as you do not prevent production of child pornography, laws like that will have no effect than tempting the curious, as the curious kind is always attracted to things that are forbidden.
It was the same with drugs 20 years ago: parents and governments were trying to deny this "immoral" thing alltogether and hide facts from the kids. Result has generated more addicts than ever. Curiosity generally kills the cat.
2 years worth of email is 20GB on my computer. I don't consider it "barely taking space" but a real annoyance when I need to backup them. Scale that to the level of a company which probably exchange 5 times the same amount of e-mails, you face a real IT issue.
England: The main island of UK, source of a lot of beer, soccer and sometimes troubles.
Scotland: Officially part of UK, hopefully not for too long since the Scottish National Party now has majority at the scot's parliament.
Wales: Part of UK with the funny accent only welsh people can understand.
Cornwall: Part of UK no one ever think about.
Isle of Man: Part of UK where the best bike races occur
Ireland: An island next to England, which is NOT part of UK, at least for the southern part.
The Republic of Ireland: the part of said "Ireland" that England could not cause troubles to since beer is better there.
Channel Islands: Drowned part of UK. Any one lives there in 2006??
Northern Ireland: the part of "Ireland" that is in "UK" and doesn't have the good beer but annoying religious zealots instead.
The United Kingdom: An entity you want to forget if you live in an island.
Britain: Anciently called "Britannia", now usually called "Great Britain". Why great? Don't ask me
Great Britain: see above.
The Falkland Islands: islands close to Argentina, where you really have to wonder what Englanders had to do there. Then english army had trouble shpping beer there since the french would shoot the boats with Exocet missiles.
Gibraltar: Another island (or is it a land?), this time south of Spain, where again you gotta wonder what the englanders are doing, if it wasn't to control entrance to the meditteranean sea.
Turks and Caicos Islands: You got me here! I have never heard of those. I suppose they don't have beer shipped there.
Bermuda: my underwear. No...wait...Another island with no beer. This time, in toasty pacific?
The British Isles: Any island is a british isle apparently...
I'm curious. Are you always so reactionary to news stories, assume the worst, and don't bother thinking critically, or only when the word "nuclear" or "radiation" is in the article?
Don't tell me you forgot that you're on Slashdot!?
Sinn Fein is an irish political party. Should I remind everyone that, despite some protestant desire to be so, Irelan is NOT Britain. It is not even in the United Kingdom.
Why am I not impressed by the level of knowledge in geography from our fellow US citizens?
How about YOU try to respond to a trespassing call as a police officer, while surrounded by 50 idiot college kids screaming at you
If you're a police officer and you freak out at 50 kids screaming at you, maybe you should not be a police officer. Teachers do that all day, they don't need to use tasers.
Another hint - he WAS handcuffed [...]. The officers did what they were supposed to do when confronted with a non-cooperative individual who is lying limply
So, to you, an individual on the floor, already handcuffed, still requires to be tasered 5 times in a row and officers are 'supposed' to do that? You're not just wrong, you can't think clearly. Stop the taser.
I am from the EU and demand that you provide credible sources before accusing elected people and other "officials" of corruption. So far, it's been the usual average and nothing as shocking as stories like Enron.
This constant tirade against Microsoft is being paid for by someone - yes, I've said it out loud. The EU officials behind this are being bribed to attack Microsoft.
The constant slander of EU officials being corrupted has got to stop, or at least provide some ground.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about. Oh..this is slashdot. Ah well..never mind.
So they did. The UN's second assessment report, in 1996, showed a 1,000-year graph demonstrating that temperature in the Middle Ages was warmer than today. [...].The wrongly flat AD1000-AD1900 temperature line was the shaft: the uptick from 1900 to 2000 was the blade. Here's how they did it:
No one ever talked about medieval age being warmer. Actually, the period he cites is called the Little Ice Age, and it's not a *new fancy I'm so 2006* theory but quite widely adopted.
No wonder it got warmer afterward.
This is not a standard unit as such, but it's perfectly valid. It basically is the sun output on a given surface. As for the earth not being a black body, it depends on the model you use and what you want to compute. In some cases, you want to take things into account like the overall albedo (the amount of light shined back by the earth between 0 and 1 - another "unit"), hence considering the earth not a white body.
"The article concludes that the days of purely desktop-based applications are clearly numbered"
That in itself is enough for me. It was the same story 10 years ago. Desktop applications are still living well and anyone involved in UI development knows they're coming back strong. The Web 2.0 hype won't live that long.
Why should the US keep control of the internet tubes?
It's been close to 30 years since the DOD started it. Nobody noticed it's now a world-wide network?
My underwear protects my music, as long as my MP3 player stays in my pocket. And I don't have to re-install my underwear after a crash...Oh wait...I do it every morning...ah well..never mind.
I'm not surprised the Tax Office jumps on the bandwagon. Now they should know that games like World of Warcraft forbid real-money transactions between players. Although not illegal, it is a mis-use of the game.
You can make a law for something that is forbidden, can you? Otherwise they should also tax transactions on drugs, laundered money, etc.
A church guy buys a PC with Windows.
The PC runs fine for 2 days, then starts having troubles, pr0n popup boxes, unending ads, etc.
No divine intervention will have it behave properly like it did, despite the efforts of our church guy
Violent behaviour follows
Slashdot Mirror
Such as SCSI or RAID support, OEM sound cards that are not Creative, any kind of graphic card (starting with the dreaded S3-equipped ones)...and more?
Because preventing a 50K ton tank of water from leaking is probably much easier and requires less material than preventing 50K tons of plutonium from radiating around?
Your post doesn't take into account the nature of what is stored. You do not need layers of lead or concrete to store water. With plutonium, you do.
I wouldn't be surprised you don't get *that* much applications. The way you seem to treat applicants reads like you're not a company to work for.
Most of my job applications in the past have never got a response.
Aside from being rather impolite in my view (do you not answer when someone asks if they can buy your product and you can't sell them for whatever reason?), you probably don't even try to take the seat of the applicant and his/her expectations. Not receiving an answer is annoying since you need to plan/schedule taking into account yet one more "unknown" factor. It's also disappointing when one makes an effort to write, apply, talk to people, to just be ignored.
If you get as far as interview, it's nice to know why you didn't succeed but you shouldn't expect it.
Actually, you'll find out at your next interview as an applicant that it doesn't really matter. Since all the interview process is just a diplomatic relationship dance, while one finds it is a failed interview, another can think otherwise. YES or NO however is what matters to you and your applicant.
just maybe you could be liable.
That's sheer paranoia. Unless you've made your choice obviously arbitrary and you shown illegal behaviour in that matter, do you think ANYONE who applies for a job would sue you because he didn't get the job? The only thing I can think about is you being liable for spreading more FUD.
The applicant and the interviewer have obligations regarding each other, but more than that, both can learn from each other exchange. Don't forget that interviews are ways to get to know each other before life-changing decisions are made. Both sides have to make an effort.
Also, you seem to consider that you're making a favor by interviewing someone. You're not. At the crudest, you need someone that will help you generate more revenue in one way or the other. And yes, you owe explanations on your decisions, to all parties involved. Someone made an effort to meet and speak with you, you should make an effort to welcome them.
This post should have a "Doh" tag IMO.
Why not pick a linux distro that supports KDE, Gnome, and others, so that the user can make their own decision.
I think you're missing the point. It's all about not providing users with options they cannot choose from because they have no idea what you're talking about (ask my gran'ma what KDE or Gnome is, she'll stare at you as if you're a mad man, although she can make her way through an UI such as the one on top of OS X). Let alone the fact that one will have a hard time understanding the difference or why there is one, average users won't even know how to select one or the other. That's what the article is about. Too much features kill the features.I definitely agree with you. I don't like this idea. I find it dangerously anti-freedom.
Then, I also do not like this 21th century moral trend to overprotect the children of any single thing, dismissing parental authority completely in the process, and goes against the wrong targets. As the post suggested, as long as you do not prevent production of child pornography, laws like that will have no effect than tempting the curious, as the curious kind is always attracted to things that are forbidden.
It was the same with drugs 20 years ago: parents and governments were trying to deny this "immoral" thing alltogether and hide facts from the kids. Result has generated more addicts than ever. Curiosity generally kills the cat.
2 years worth of email is 20GB on my computer. I don't consider it "barely taking space" but a real annoyance when I need to backup them.
Scale that to the level of a company which probably exchange 5 times the same amount of e-mails, you face a real IT issue.
Here's my answers to this fun trivia.
England: The main island of UK, source of a lot of beer, soccer and sometimes troubles.Scotland: Officially part of UK, hopefully not for too long since the Scottish National Party now has majority at the scot's parliament.
Wales: Part of UK with the funny accent only welsh people can understand.
Cornwall: Part of UK no one ever think about.
Isle of Man: Part of UK where the best bike races occur
Ireland: An island next to England, which is NOT part of UK, at least for the southern part.
The Republic of Ireland: the part of said "Ireland" that England could not cause troubles to since beer is better there.
Channel Islands: Drowned part of UK. Any one lives there in 2006??
Northern Ireland: the part of "Ireland" that is in "UK" and doesn't have the good beer but annoying religious zealots instead.
The United Kingdom: An entity you want to forget if you live in an island.
Britain: Anciently called "Britannia", now usually called "Great Britain". Why great? Don't ask me
Great Britain: see above.
The Falkland Islands: islands close to Argentina, where you really have to wonder what Englanders had to do there. Then english army had trouble shpping beer there since the french would shoot the boats with Exocet missiles.
Gibraltar: Another island (or is it a land?), this time south of Spain, where again you gotta wonder what the englanders are doing, if it wasn't to control entrance to the meditteranean sea.
Turks and Caicos Islands: You got me here! I have never heard of those. I suppose they don't have beer shipped there.
Bermuda: my underwear. No...wait...Another island with no beer. This time, in toasty pacific?
The British Isles: Any island is a british isle apparently...
I'm curious. Are you always so reactionary to news stories, assume the worst, and don't bother thinking critically, or only when the word "nuclear" or "radiation" is in the article?
Don't tell me you forgot that you're on Slashdot!?
Absolutely! Doesn't it seems like the major problems nowaday is BECAUSE everyone wants one?
Oh! Look! A moronic troll...
Why am I not impressed by the level of knowledge in geography from our fellow US citizens?
The nerd in me feel so concerned about this incredible news! It really matters to me.
Oh wait...maybe I'm just being insensitive...
If you're a police officer and you freak out at 50 kids screaming at you, maybe you should not be a police officer. Teachers do that all day, they don't need to use tasers.
Another hint - he WAS handcuffed [...]. The officers did what they were supposed to do when confronted with a non-cooperative individual who is lying limplySo, to you, an individual on the floor, already handcuffed, still requires to be tasered 5 times in a row and officers are 'supposed' to do that? You're not just wrong, you can't think clearly. Stop the taser.
This constant tirade against Microsoft is being paid for by someone - yes, I've said it out loud. The EU officials behind this are being bribed to attack Microsoft.
The constant slander of EU officials being corrupted has got to stop, or at least provide some ground.
You obviously don't know what you're talking about. Oh..this is slashdot. Ah well..never mind.
The demo page is full of typo errors and it just doesn't work with Firefox. Now THAT is secure since nothing goes anywhere...
I add my random scan to it
So they did. The UN's second assessment report, in 1996, showed a 1,000-year graph demonstrating that temperature in the Middle Ages was warmer than today. [...].The wrongly flat AD1000-AD1900 temperature line was the shaft: the uptick from 1900 to 2000 was the blade. Here's how they did it:
No one ever talked about medieval age being warmer. Actually, the period he cites is called the Little Ice Age, and it's not a *new fancy I'm so 2006* theory but quite widely adopted. No wonder it got warmer afterward.
This is not a standard unit as such, but it's perfectly valid. It basically is the sun output on a given surface. As for the earth not being a black body, it depends on the model you use and what you want to compute. In some cases, you want to take things into account like the overall albedo (the amount of light shined back by the earth between 0 and 1 - another "unit"), hence considering the earth not a white body.
"The article concludes that the days of purely desktop-based applications are clearly numbered"
That in itself is enough for me. It was the same story 10 years ago. Desktop applications are still living well and anyone involved in UI development knows they're coming back strong. The Web 2.0 hype won't live that long.
Why should the US keep control of the internet tubes? It's been close to 30 years since the DOD started it. Nobody noticed it's now a world-wide network?
My underwear protects my music, as long as my MP3 player stays in my pocket. And I don't have to re-install my underwear after a crash...Oh wait...I do it every morning...ah well..never mind.
Are M$ going to distribute LILO through their distribution channels? I like that!
Oh..wait...that's not it? Ah well..I never read the FA anyway.
Each time I get a new breath of hope for the USA, some story like this pops up and non-sense takes yet another dimension.
I for once welcome our future asocial coach potatoes overlords! At least I feel safer in being less moronic.
I'm not surprised the Tax Office jumps on the bandwagon. Now they should know that games like World of Warcraft forbid real-money transactions between players. Although not illegal, it is a mis-use of the game.
You can make a law for something that is forbidden, can you? Otherwise they should also tax transactions on drugs, laundered money, etc.
Thinking about it, it makes a lot of sense...
A church guy buys a PC with Windows.
The PC runs fine for 2 days, then starts having troubles, pr0n popup boxes, unending ads, etc.
No divine intervention will have it behave properly like it did, despite the efforts of our church guy
Violent behaviour follows