I usually drop off a bunch where I get my clothes done. I don't need them and if they can reuse them, more power to them. It's better than me having to bundle them up for the trash pick-up.
Maybe dry cleaners should let their customers know that they can reuse the hangers. I'll bet most people don't know they can be reused.
As long as labor can't flow as freely as jobs can, there's a place for tariffs.
Not to mention that the conditions under which a lot of these laborors work in those countries would be illegal over here. It's impossible to compete with what is essentially slave labor. And with the problems and dangers we've encountered recently with Chinese goods, I don't know why we need to be doing business with them. We can slap the hand of the importer, but have no control in going after the manufacturer or wholesale product supplier.
Now, if and when the Chinese start being seriously affected I'll bet they'll start clamoring to the UAE to increase oil flow. That and their increase in oil usage.
If Americans find it too boring, then companies will have to find somewhere else that really wants the jobs. It happened with customer support, it now looks like it will happen with IT, when telepresence robotics takes off it will probably happen with garbage collection, taxi driving, and long haul trucking.
It's already happening and has been happening the last 10 years. (You don't suppose the teens growing up have noticed THAT trend, do you?) At first, I wondered if this article was just some propaganda for the, "look--we need more H-1B workers to do the jobs"!
First off it's a survey of non-IT graduates (so who knows what degree they're actually getting, i.e., music appreciation) and less than 10% of the total surveyed felt the "benefits of an IT-based degree had been effectively communicated to them at school." Forget benefits, how about what work they can do with an IT or related degree? I'll bet most think of computer programmer and that's about it.
I think job futures are better communicated today--when I grew up they gave you an aptitude test in high school and you sat with a guidance counselor who probably didn't know any more about the outside world than you did. Now people take their kids to work and companies are getting involved in schools much earlier instead of waiting until you've graduated only to find out there's no jobs in your field or you dislike the work. But at times you don't realize that what you like to do might mesh with a different career choice. More needs to be done on explaining what jobs are out there now, what's likely for the future and what's needed to get there. I know several people when I entered college went into the oil industry which was doing well at the time (late 70s), but by the time they got out, the boom went bust and they had degrees, but no jobs to be found. But that's the nature of that industry. Just like the Internet boom and bust. You've got to find that bleeding edge (especially in technology) and ride it for as long as the wave goes and be able hopefully see what's coming ahead enough to make quick changes when necessary.
Yes, tedious jobs pay the bills, (unless they can hire unskilled, illegal labor to do it!) But I feel to really be a success you must get some joy or satisfaction out of what you do. Otherwise you'll turn into a clock-in, clock-out nimrod who does enough to pay the bills and hope to keep from getting fired.
Side note, the article is being just rabble-rousing by comparing waistlines considering that Americans are so much taller on average than Japanese it makes sense that they would be proportionally larger in waist size.
Which is just as ridiculous as using the BMI here. BMI is a calculator that only takes into account your height and weight. It doesn't take into account body frame or muscle mass or even differentiates between men and women. So a body builder or someone who was fit by any other standard can come up as obese.
I suspect AI will first be a communication device before it becomes a full 3D robot capable of learning.
Sign language and communication with apes such as chimpanzees and gorillas (Washoe and Koko respectively) have shown that they are not just mimicking signs, but will make up their own expressions when they don't know the actual term. Such as "drink-fruit" or "candy-drink" for watermelon or "finger-bracelet" for ring. This showed a development of logic and thought process.
Of course it's easy enough to load a computer program with words and definitions, but if the machine can reinterpret expressions or come up with it's own logical twists. Can it understand the nuances of a joke? The real hang-up (adding on visual ability) will be if it can interpret the visual cues humans put out. Can it tell if someone's nervous, in need of medical care (unconscious vs. asleep) or when they're lying? That will be one of the larger challenges.
Isn't that the funniest thing about this guy? His comedy routine is quite vulgar, and not anything for children to see, yet he did some time playing Mr. Conductor on the Thomas the Tank Engine show. It's really weird when you think about it. Paul Ruebens/Pee-wee Herman
I was very confused for a moment. The President defending privacy? Then I read your link.
In a statement, the White House strongly objected to provisions of the bill that would send $4 billion in aid to communities hard-hit by foreclosures, faulted other spending plans and changes in how regulators oversee housing programs.
"The federal government must not prolong necessary corrections in the housing market, bail out lenders, or subsidize irresponsible borrowing and lending," the White House said in a statement.
Whew...For a second, there, I was in danger of having my preconceived notions being shattered. What a relief!
It was clear that this was another one of those declarations that politicians love to slip in at the last minute hoping no one will notice becase the bill is hundreds of pages long. And what would be great about allowing the federal government to (again!) bail out greedy banks! In fact there's over 400 people in the lending industry being charged with mortgage related fraud!
[sarcasm]Wait a minute...bailing out big business...that can't be democrats supporting that. It must be the greedy, big business republicans. [/sarcasm]
What we need to get over is the myth that all democrats are for the "little guy" and all republicans are for big business interests. There are some trying to do the people's business, but unfortunately, most politicians of either party are in for themselves and how much lobbyists can pony up. Then they throw us a bone once and awhile to shut us up. Short of throwing them all out and instituting term limits, I think it's only going to get worse.
You know how you can tell the party affiliations on a Slashdot story? If its negative about a Republican the summary almost always mentions it. If its negative about a Democrat they usually just say "Senator" or 'Congressman" with no party affiliation.As far as I've seen, Slashdot doesn't have a democrat bias, it has an anti-administrative bias. Actually, this isn't just Slashdot per se, the NYT and other major papers and news services do this all the time.
Unfortunately, the bias on Slashdot usually comes from moderators that mod people down they simply disagree with rather that whether they're actually being derisive or not. This especially shows up on the political pages.
Do cashiers and bank tellers pilfer from their tills? Rarely. Those that do lose their jobs. Most of the general population is generally honest and of good character.
You're comparing an employee at the bottom of the job chain to one at the top. Cashiers and tellers are checked on by managment constantly and any funds missing would be quickly noticed. A bank manager OTOH, would know how to obuscate the monies at least long enough to insure his early retirement. So, unless he has a CIO keeping tabs on his every move, a sysadmin could easily access areas unnoticed. And he's just peaking through things, so nothing is going to turn up missing. No they're not going to look through everything, but if they see some interesting subjectlines on confidential emails regarding pending layoffs, you really think he or she isn't going to take a peek?
If you're going to do a honesty comparison, you should compare it to how many people at the TOP of the employee chain are found with their hands in the till *cough*Enron*cough*. The more access you have, the higher your character level is going to have to be to resist temptaion to abuse your situation.
It truly has nothing to do with sex. It's about communication. Some people are good at communicating, others are just good at talking. They are not the same.
Well communicated:)
I do think the article is sexist--being able to judge 70-80% of the time which sex is doing the coding is not really showing much of a trend. Some coders are more meticulous. You cannot judge that the women (or men) who put in the comments did so to help future coders or just as a note to themselves. Or some code may seem obfuscated, but it's just the way the programmer's brain is wired. The article does itself a diservice, it distracts from it's two main points: Getting more women into programming and making sure programmers are better at communication within their code so as not to hamper the company. But it's not helpful to say you want more women programmers (simply) because they comment nicely in the programming.
Personally, as the article touched on, I think the most successful way to increase the number of women programmers, engineers, mathematicians, etc. will be as girls see more women in those positions.
Sure, women have a different way. In my experience, that is rarely the best, most concise, most efficient way of doing something.
When giving directions, most men will say something like, "Turn north on Smith Street." Technically, it's correct, but most people don't know north from south.
A woman usually navigates via landmarks, such as, "turn right at the Shell station." That can also be confusing if it's *too* generic and the driver is going to be passing a lot of Shell stations. OTOH, it's often a lot easier to see and remember a landmark than a often obscured street sign. That doesn't make it more or less concise than a man's directions.
When giving directions, don't give people your special "short cut route" unless you're having to do so they can avoid construction or other major delay. Short cuts are rarely direct and it's best to have as few turns as possible even it means it's longer mileage-wise. If you write down directions to send, it's best to double check with a map as it's easy to leave out parts when it's somewhere you travel all the time. Or better yet, just Goggle a map, print it out and tuck it into the invite.
As to code, sloppy, lazy code is just that and there's no helping someone with bad habits. But if someone is trying to make it cryptic on purpose to be macho or, more likely, a feeble attempt at job security, they're an idiot. THEY may have to go back one day and rework that code and trust me, they won't remember what they were doing. I think a lot of coders don't document like they should, usually because they're under a deadline. Or they think they won't have a problem because they're working in it all the time. And they almost never go back after the project to document. But consider that, situations change, and you might find yourself changing languages, working for a year or so on another project. THEN just try and go back to ASP after being immersed into ASP.net or Perl or something else. You'll wish you'd paid more attention to documenting.
Are you suggesting that it's a good thing that being elected President is just as much about convincing the average voter that you're just like them as it is about accomplishing things that the average person hasn't?
No, but that's what a lot of them spend time trying to do. Convince us they're the everyman. Then we see a picture of them having a hard time getting a coffee machine to work or an ATM. I think while some have some accomplishments, there's not that much that separates them from us other than they've made it a goal to enter politics and either a pile of money in the family or supporters who give them a pile of money. Most have had no life other than politics. And I really don't believe most (in the higher offices, like congress) are their because they want to help people, if they ever had that sentiment. They're in it for themselves.
And what have these candidates accomplished? One's a brand new senator, another tried to ride her husband's coattails into office. The third is a genuine war hero, but has been in the washington bubble so long.
If you're trying to apply lessons from North Korea to Al Qaeda, you're not going to get very far. The government of North Korea has recognizable motives, a desire for self preservation, and an understanding of its limits. It's possible to negotiate and work with North Korea without blowing them up. The mistake is in assuming that they'll be an honest partner in those negotiations if it's not in their best interest to do so.
And I agree...I'm not trying to say they're the same, I'm pointing out the failure in previous negotiations was to simply make agreements and then walk away without demanding checks to make sure they were holding up their end. Trust, but verify. Bush was right to bring other countries who where a lot closer to those missiles into the negotiation. I don't trust China, but I don't think they're going to let NK get in too deep and put themselves in danger. Japan certainly won't. Which is why NK doesn't want the rest of their neighbors involved in the intervention.
Dealing with Al Qaeda is a different beast, and I think that we've constantly made mistakes in treating them like a nation state that can simply be beaten into submission. The reality is that the truly crazy people of the world, while they can't be negotiated with, are also in the minority. They have a hard time operating in an environment where people don't sympathize with them. If a small cult of Americans decided that they wanted to impose Christianity on the world and were willing to blow up vegetable markets and police stations over it, they'd be done for. Why? No sympathizers. Not possible to recruit people, get funding, or keep secrets.
I agree with most of what you say, but I think you're missing one point. The reason--why would we have no sympathizers in your scenario? Why? Because people are happy with the status quo. Even our poorest live lives only dreamed of by third world people. That's why the middle east oppressors keep, for example, the Palestinians in refugee camps. (There is no such thing as a Palestinian anyway--there never was a country of Palestine until Arafat declared it to be.) These people were Arabs, Egyptians, etc. but they are kept in refugee camps because if they assimilated back into the Arab countries, Hamas couldn't keep supplying suicide bombers. The last thing that Iran (along with other Arab countries) want to see is a democratically controlled Iraq where they have open elections and basic civil rights.
That's why we DIDN'T go in and blow them into the dirt. We wanted to eventually help rebuild a democratically elected government. When a people are no longer oppressed and can work and feed their family, they're not going to care about sending their children out to blow themselves up.
Al Qaeda is a lot closer to what we dealt with regarding Japan in WWII. There you had an emperor whom the people worshipped as god and who's people committed suicide bombing runs. After the war, it stil
If the soldiers were assigned the task of emptying the Pacific Ocean with measuring cups, would it be disrespectful of the soldiers to point out that their mission is a bad idea?
No...THAT would be a crack-headed idea and is absurd to the point it almost doesn't deserve an answer. The thing is the soldiers, the ones with their boots on the ground, THEY are supporting this effort and making a difference. They're also tired of the press, like in your NY Times story that works hard to make sure the news is negative. Are the merchants frustrated. I'm sure some are. (They certainly wouldn't have had the freedom to complain like that when Sadamm was in power.) But it begs the question, where are the Iraqi police. The Iraqis are going to have to learn to govern themselves. Then again we were in Japan for 10 years after WWII to get them up an running.
I disagree totally that McCain was "flat out lying" about conditions. I'm no McCain fan either, but I think the problem is like a lot of politicians that have been in office forever. He goes over and is, of course, under extreme protection. He never gets to see it like it is when the military presence is not there. I think politicians lose touch because they are so protected and cocooned. I'd love to see some sort of term limits put in place for Congress so we could get more people who have done something besides run for office.
Far more insulting was when Hillary tried to fabricate a story of dodging gunfire while visiting Serbia. That was an insult to the military and those there to protect her. There's no way a first lady's plane or helicopter is going to be allowed to set down in a hostile or dangerous zone.
Wow and what a bunch of egotistical, elitist tripe. I'm sure the "common man" didn't think much of you looking down your nose at him either, although I seriously doubt you've really dealt with that many. The problem with elitists is they never venture far from their own watering hole and only mingle with their own kind so they can preen each other's feathers and tell each other how much better, much more intelligent they are than the rest of the world.
Anti-intellectual movements FTW!
If you a brain, you would have known that was not an rant against intelligence, but of those in the "intellectual class." There's a difference. These are the very same people who during WWII told us that Hitler really wasn't such a bad guy and that we shouldn't get involved. It was Lenin (my bad, not Stalin) that called them "useful idiots," not I. You'd think they would have learned from that but I think maybe their heads are so swelled they can't fit in any lessons from history.
Yes, we should NEVER reason with people, only chop their heads off. Perhaps understanding WHY 9/11 happened would have been a good thing, it would have probably have been better to do that before ensuring that more people want to blow us up.
First off you cannot reason with the unreasonable. We've reasoned with North Korea right into them having the time to build a nuclear facility. And we know WHY Al Qaeda and other terrorists hate us. They want to bring us down so they can create a world where their brand of Islamic fundamentalism is the law. We stand in the way of that. They hate us for who we are and nothing we say or do (or should say or do) is going to change their visceral hatred of anyone (including other Muslims) that don't ascribe to their beliefs. We virtually ignored the attack in 1993 and so left ourselves open for 9-11.
No one in power should be common. My experience with the common, non-educated, man is not encouraging.
I don't think there's hardly been anyone in the presidency this last century that was "common" or uneducated. Most have either been born into wealthy families or at least ones with connections or there's no way they would have had the financial support to be elected. That despite how almost all like to pretend they came from 'regular folk.' I think perhaps you'd be happier in a country with a autocracy or perhaps a absolute monarchy ruling. Can't get more elitist that someone born to the throne and that way you don't have to worry about all those "common folk" having a say-so.
There are a large number of people who have been privileged to live at a time of peace where we were too young to serve in Vietnam and too old to enlist in the Gulf war. I'll ask the same of you since you're are so rude and I hoped you served if you expect everyone else to. And if you feel than only someone who has served can know how it is, then I expect you to vote for McCain, because Obama has not. So by your own logic you are saying he doesn't know enough to make such a decision.
I see a whole LOT of people that claim they care about the soldiers, but then want to pull them out and abandon Iraq. You cannot claim to support the soldier and then disrespect their mission. I've had relatives deployed in the Gulf. The soldiers, former and current, that I've had the privilege to speak to or hear speak WANT to finish the job. They can see the goal and know what will happen if we unilaterally pull out.
McCain's probably gone through some of the worst things a soldier can. You don't see him calling to abandon the war and he knows the tragedy first hand.
When I said that powerful dark forces will be at work, why did you think I was referring to the Republicans? (Oh, wait...)
There's a lot of people still out there than think Bush planned 9-11.
There are whole countries that would like to see the Republicans back in power, as well as major global industries.
I don't see that at all except for a handful. There are many more countries that want to see us taken down a notch and having someone who leans more towards socialism the better. And despite the verbal attacks on large businesses, especially oil right now and soon, the pharmaceutical again, there is little democrats will do and they certainly don't look out for US businesses anymore. To believe most global corporations are concerned about the democratic party--now that would be naive. Donations from corporate giants flow into the pockets of both parties. Generally all the democrats do is to "tax" the business. Which simply means the business raises it's prices on us. Businesses don't pay taxes--the consumer does.
The best recent example (the book was written in 1989) is America's reaction to the 9/11 attacks. More people died of hunger that day than were killed in the attack.
In the US? I'm calling BS on that one unless you have some stats that prove otherwise. The most commonly used number is 24,000 world-wide which the vast amount is going to be in 3rd world countries. And you can hardly compare the effect on having 3,000+ of your countrymen killed vs. a worldwide, mostly anonymous group of people. And this was the largest attack on our homeland since Pearl Harbor. Had it happened later in the day, even more would have died.
The US response to the attacks was totally illogical because people felt threatened and this caused them to stop using the higher levels of their brains.
So-called "higher levels of their brains" simply suggests that you then turn around and reason with those who attacked you. (And this is WHY most Americans don't trust democrats when it comes to national security.) That's like being bitten by a snake. I do not turn around and reason with the snake. I cut its head off.
I might remind you that the "intellectual classes" are the FIRST people who are off'd after a military coup. Not because of their intelligence, but because they are quick and easy prey who only realize their mistake when it's too late. Stalin called them "useful idiots." OTOH, those so-called "reptilian flight or fight" instincts have a lot to be said for and have kept our butts alive for millions of years.
Unfortunately, I think there are going to be powerful dark forces at work to try get the Republicans back in again.
I can't believe this was modded up as 5 insightful unless you're into tin foil hats and seeing black helicopters everywhere. Sorry, but I get really irritated at the idea that EITHER party would perpetuate an attack on their own people just to get elected. That's beyond the pale.
People are easily swayed. Another terrorist attack in the USA I think could sway the elections.
And WHY would it be easily swayed...because perhaps when it comes down to protecting the country the population has more confidence in the republicans to do the job right.
However, there is no way terrorists are going to attack us right now and ensure a victory for McCain. But trust me, if Obama keeps coming across as weak, i.e., wants to negotiate with terrorists, wants to cut and run in Iraq, we WILL be attacked if he's elected. They will attack if our elected leader is seen to be weak.
In a way, this mirrors the Scott Peterson case in California except there was a body. There was some evidence that Scott was involved but nothing definitive. His behavior and his affair raised suspicions. But like this case, the juror saw a defendant who was deceptive.
I would say that placing himself 80 miles away in the bay the day she disappeared and where his wife and child's bodies washed up a few months later was pretty definitive. Just the fact that his alibi was that he went fishing on Christmas Eve and having an 8-month pregnant wife about to deliver their first child made me suspect him early on. NO woman in that state is going to just let hubby go fishing 80 miles away while she prepares for company over Christmas.
I'm not that familiar with this case, but it's not uncommon for the husband to claim the woman abandoned their children for another life. But when examining the wife's character, it turns out extremely unlikely. There's another case, this time a Drew Peterson (a former cop) who's 3rd wife's manner of death has recently been change from accidental to homicide and who's 4th wife has disappeared. He's claiming she ran off with another man. Most, including police, have there doubts. But unless they find the body, they'll probably only be able to charge him with the 3rd wife's death. His manner is also cocky, so I have no doubt he'll trip himself up eventually.
From what I know of this case, Hans Reiser was the last known person to see Nina Reiser. It seems very doubtful that she not only would abandon her children to her ex-husband, but travel to Russia and then never contact her parents. Motive (divorce), means and opportunity were certainly all there along with forensic evidence of her blood. Defense lawyers love to disdain evidence as "circumstantial" but circumstantial evidence simply means there wasn't an eye-witness to the murder and is the type of evidence that makes up most cases.
Slashdot Mirror
I usually drop off a bunch where I get my clothes done. I don't need them and if they can reuse them, more power to them. It's better than me having to bundle them up for the trash pick-up.
Maybe dry cleaners should let their customers know that they can reuse the hangers. I'll bet most people don't know they can be reused.
As long as labor can't flow as freely as jobs can, there's a place for tariffs.
Not to mention that the conditions under which a lot of these laborors work in those countries would be illegal over here. It's impossible to compete with what is essentially slave labor. And with the problems and dangers we've encountered recently with Chinese goods, I don't know why we need to be doing business with them. We can slap the hand of the importer, but have no control in going after the manufacturer or wholesale product supplier.
Now, if and when the Chinese start being seriously affected I'll bet they'll start clamoring to the UAE to increase oil flow. That and their increase in oil usage.
It's already happening and has been happening the last 10 years. (You don't suppose the teens growing up have noticed THAT trend, do you?) At first, I wondered if this article was just some propaganda for the, "look--we need more H-1B workers to do the jobs"!
First off it's a survey of non-IT graduates (so who knows what degree they're actually getting, i.e., music appreciation) and less than 10% of the total surveyed felt the "benefits of an IT-based degree had been effectively communicated to them at school." Forget benefits, how about what work they can do with an IT or related degree? I'll bet most think of computer programmer and that's about it.
I think job futures are better communicated today--when I grew up they gave you an aptitude test in high school and you sat with a guidance counselor who probably didn't know any more about the outside world than you did. Now people take their kids to work and companies are getting involved in schools much earlier instead of waiting until you've graduated only to find out there's no jobs in your field or you dislike the work. But at times you don't realize that what you like to do might mesh with a different career choice. More needs to be done on explaining what jobs are out there now, what's likely for the future and what's needed to get there. I know several people when I entered college went into the oil industry which was doing well at the time (late 70s), but by the time they got out, the boom went bust and they had degrees, but no jobs to be found. But that's the nature of that industry. Just like the Internet boom and bust. You've got to find that bleeding edge (especially in technology) and ride it for as long as the wave goes and be able hopefully see what's coming ahead enough to make quick changes when necessary.
Yes, tedious jobs pay the bills, (unless they can hire unskilled, illegal labor to do it!) But I feel to really be a success you must get some joy or satisfaction out of what you do. Otherwise you'll turn into a clock-in, clock-out nimrod who does enough to pay the bills and hope to keep from getting fired.
Ironically, at the bottom in the related links, was the story IT staff wasted on non-strategic 'chores'. Maybe the survey members saw that article!
Which is just as ridiculous as using the BMI here. BMI is a calculator that only takes into account your height and weight. It doesn't take into account body frame or muscle mass or even differentiates between men and women. So a body builder or someone who was fit by any other standard can come up as obese.
Or better yet, let's just test the unborn for those bad genes and abort those who don't pass the test.
Hmmm....seems someone else had a similar idea.
P.S. No this isn't flamebait. I'm just making a point of where this sort of idea thing leads.
P.P.S. Sad to say you have to put these sorts of postscripts.
I suspect AI will first be a communication device before it becomes a full 3D robot capable of learning.
Sign language and communication with apes such as chimpanzees and gorillas (Washoe and Koko respectively) have shown that they are not just mimicking signs, but will make up their own expressions when they don't know the actual term. Such as "drink-fruit" or "candy-drink" for watermelon or "finger-bracelet" for ring. This showed a development of logic and thought process.
Of course it's easy enough to load a computer program with words and definitions, but if the machine can reinterpret expressions or come up with it's own logical twists. Can it understand the nuances of a joke? The real hang-up (adding on visual ability) will be if it can interpret the visual cues humans put out. Can it tell if someone's nervous, in need of medical care (unconscious vs. asleep) or when they're lying? That will be one of the larger challenges.
Nuff said!
In a statement, the White House strongly objected to provisions of the bill that would send $4 billion in aid to communities hard-hit by foreclosures, faulted other spending plans and changes in how regulators oversee housing programs.
"The federal government must not prolong necessary corrections in the housing market, bail out lenders, or subsidize irresponsible borrowing and lending," the White House said in a statement.
Whew...For a second, there, I was in danger of having my preconceived notions being shattered. What a relief!
It was clear that this was another one of those declarations that politicians love to slip in at the last minute hoping no one will notice becase the bill is hundreds of pages long. And what would be great about allowing the federal government to (again!) bail out greedy banks! In fact there's over 400 people in the lending industry being charged with mortgage related fraud!
[sarcasm]Wait a minute...bailing out big business...that can't be democrats supporting that. It must be the greedy, big business republicans. [/sarcasm]
What we need to get over is the myth that all democrats are for the "little guy" and all republicans are for big business interests. There are some trying to do the people's business, but unfortunately, most politicians of either party are in for themselves and how much lobbyists can pony up. Then they throw us a bone once and awhile to shut us up. Short of throwing them all out and instituting term limits, I think it's only going to get worse.
Unfortunately, the bias on Slashdot usually comes from moderators that mod people down they simply disagree with rather that whether they're actually being derisive or not. This especially shows up on the political pages.
How about performance.
I don't know, that Ice T guy seems to be pretty talented. First he's a rapper, then he's an actor, now he's writing Java....what?
Oh, nevermind....
Do cashiers and bank tellers pilfer from their tills? Rarely. Those that do lose their jobs. Most of the general population is generally honest and of good character.
You're comparing an employee at the bottom of the job chain to one at the top. Cashiers and tellers are checked on by managment constantly and any funds missing would be quickly noticed. A bank manager OTOH, would know how to obuscate the monies at least long enough to insure his early retirement. So, unless he has a CIO keeping tabs on his every move, a sysadmin could easily access areas unnoticed. And he's just peaking through things, so nothing is going to turn up missing. No they're not going to look through everything, but if they see some interesting subjectlines on confidential emails regarding pending layoffs, you really think he or she isn't going to take a peek?
If you're going to do a honesty comparison, you should compare it to how many people at the TOP of the employee chain are found with their hands in the till *cough*Enron*cough*. The more access you have, the higher your character level is going to have to be to resist temptaion to abuse your situation.
Did they lie on the survey or really don't snoop?"
I say most lied. Knowledge is power and it would be too damn tempting when you could have your finger on the company's pulse.
It would also explain the smug look. (kidding!)
But if he waits too long, they might run out. ;-)
It truly has nothing to do with sex. It's about communication. Some people are good at communicating, others are just good at talking. They are not the same.
:)
Well communicated
I do think the article is sexist--being able to judge 70-80% of the time which sex is doing the coding is not really showing much of a trend. Some coders are more meticulous. You cannot judge that the women (or men) who put in the comments did so to help future coders or just as a note to themselves. Or some code may seem obfuscated, but it's just the way the programmer's brain is wired. The article does itself a diservice, it distracts from it's two main points: Getting more women into programming and making sure programmers are better at communication within their code so as not to hamper the company. But it's not helpful to say you want more women programmers (simply) because they comment nicely in the programming.
Personally, as the article touched on, I think the most successful way to increase the number of women programmers, engineers, mathematicians, etc. will be as girls see more women in those positions.
Sure, women have a different way. In my experience, that is rarely the best, most concise, most efficient way of doing something.
When giving directions, most men will say something like, "Turn north on Smith Street." Technically, it's correct, but most people don't know north from south.
A woman usually navigates via landmarks, such as, "turn right at the Shell station." That can also be confusing if it's *too* generic and the driver is going to be passing a lot of Shell stations. OTOH, it's often a lot easier to see and remember a landmark than a often obscured street sign. That doesn't make it more or less concise than a man's directions.
When giving directions, don't give people your special "short cut route" unless you're having to do so they can avoid construction or other major delay. Short cuts are rarely direct and it's best to have as few turns as possible even it means it's longer mileage-wise. If you write down directions to send, it's best to double check with a map as it's easy to leave out parts when it's somewhere you travel all the time. Or better yet, just Goggle a map, print it out and tuck it into the invite.
As to code, sloppy, lazy code is just that and there's no helping someone with bad habits. But if someone is trying to make it cryptic on purpose to be macho or, more likely, a feeble attempt at job security, they're an idiot. THEY may have to go back one day and rework that code and trust me, they won't remember what they were doing. I think a lot of coders don't document like they should, usually because they're under a deadline. Or they think they won't have a problem because they're working in it all the time. And they almost never go back after the project to document. But consider that, situations change, and you might find yourself changing languages, working for a year or so on another project. THEN just try and go back to ASP after being immersed into ASP.net or Perl or something else. You'll wish you'd paid more attention to documenting.
Are you suggesting that it's a good thing that being elected President is just as much about convincing the average voter that you're just like them as it is about accomplishing things that the average person hasn't?
No, but that's what a lot of them spend time trying to do. Convince us they're the everyman. Then we see a picture of them having a hard time getting a coffee machine to work or an ATM. I think while some have some accomplishments, there's not that much that separates them from us other than they've made it a goal to enter politics and either a pile of money in the family or supporters who give them a pile of money. Most have had no life other than politics. And I really don't believe most (in the higher offices, like congress) are their because they want to help people, if they ever had that sentiment. They're in it for themselves.
And what have these candidates accomplished? One's a brand new senator, another tried to ride her husband's coattails into office. The third is a genuine war hero, but has been in the washington bubble so long.
If you're trying to apply lessons from North Korea to Al Qaeda, you're not going to get very far. The government of North Korea has recognizable motives, a desire for self preservation, and an understanding of its limits. It's possible to negotiate and work with North Korea without blowing them up. The mistake is in assuming that they'll be an honest partner in those negotiations if it's not in their best interest to do so.
And I agree...I'm not trying to say they're the same, I'm pointing out the failure in previous negotiations was to simply make agreements and then walk away without demanding checks to make sure they were holding up their end. Trust, but verify. Bush was right to bring other countries who where a lot closer to those missiles into the negotiation. I don't trust China, but I don't think they're going to let NK get in too deep and put themselves in danger. Japan certainly won't. Which is why NK doesn't want the rest of their neighbors involved in the intervention.
Dealing with Al Qaeda is a different beast, and I think that we've constantly made mistakes in treating them like a nation state that can simply be beaten into submission. The reality is that the truly crazy people of the world, while they can't be negotiated with, are also in the minority. They have a hard time operating in an environment where people don't sympathize with them. If a small cult of Americans decided that they wanted to impose Christianity on the world and were willing to blow up vegetable markets and police stations over it, they'd be done for. Why? No sympathizers. Not possible to recruit people, get funding, or keep secrets.
I agree with most of what you say, but I think you're missing one point. The reason--why would we have no sympathizers in your scenario? Why? Because people are happy with the status quo. Even our poorest live lives only dreamed of by third world people. That's why the middle east oppressors keep, for example, the Palestinians in refugee camps. (There is no such thing as a Palestinian anyway--there never was a country of Palestine until Arafat declared it to be.) These people were Arabs, Egyptians, etc. but they are kept in refugee camps because if they assimilated back into the Arab countries, Hamas couldn't keep supplying suicide bombers. The last thing that Iran (along with other Arab countries) want to see is a democratically controlled Iraq where they have open elections and basic civil rights.
That's why we DIDN'T go in and blow them into the dirt. We wanted to eventually help rebuild a democratically elected government. When a people are no longer oppressed and can work and feed their family, they're not going to care about sending their children out to blow themselves up.
Al Qaeda is a lot closer to what we dealt with regarding Japan in WWII. There you had an emperor whom the people worshipped as god and who's people committed suicide bombing runs. After the war, it stil
Was one of the best buys I've made, especially given that the £40 was in vouchers that we'd won on a competition.
;-)
Only on Slashdot would someone brag about being a cheap bastard when buying their girlfriend's gift.
If the soldiers were assigned the task of emptying the Pacific Ocean with measuring cups, would it be disrespectful of the soldiers to point out that their mission is a bad idea?
No...THAT would be a crack-headed idea and is absurd to the point it almost doesn't deserve an answer. The thing is the soldiers, the ones with their boots on the ground, THEY are supporting this effort and making a difference. They're also tired of the press, like in your NY Times story that works hard to make sure the news is negative. Are the merchants frustrated. I'm sure some are. (They certainly wouldn't have had the freedom to complain like that when Sadamm was in power.) But it begs the question, where are the Iraqi police. The Iraqis are going to have to learn to govern themselves. Then again we were in Japan for 10 years after WWII to get them up an running.
I disagree totally that McCain was "flat out lying" about conditions. I'm no McCain fan either, but I think the problem is like a lot of politicians that have been in office forever. He goes over and is, of course, under extreme protection. He never gets to see it like it is when the military presence is not there. I think politicians lose touch because they are so protected and cocooned. I'd love to see some sort of term limits put in place for Congress so we could get more people who have done something besides run for office.
Far more insulting was when Hillary tried to fabricate a story of dodging gunfire while visiting Serbia. That was an insult to the military and those there to protect her. There's no way a first lady's plane or helicopter is going to be allowed to set down in a hostile or dangerous zone.
Wow and what a bunch of egotistical, elitist tripe. I'm sure the "common man" didn't think much of you looking down your nose at him either, although I seriously doubt you've really dealt with that many. The problem with elitists is they never venture far from their own watering hole and only mingle with their own kind so they can preen each other's feathers and tell each other how much better, much more intelligent they are than the rest of the world.
Anti-intellectual movements FTW!
If you a brain, you would have known that was not an rant against intelligence, but of those in the "intellectual class." There's a difference. These are the very same people who during WWII told us that Hitler really wasn't such a bad guy and that we shouldn't get involved. It was Lenin (my bad, not Stalin) that called them "useful idiots," not I. You'd think they would have learned from that but I think maybe their heads are so swelled they can't fit in any lessons from history.
Yes, we should NEVER reason with people, only chop their heads off. Perhaps understanding WHY 9/11 happened would have been a good thing, it would have probably have been better to do that before ensuring that more people want to blow us up.
First off you cannot reason with the unreasonable. We've reasoned with North Korea right into them having the time to build a nuclear facility. And we know WHY Al Qaeda and other terrorists hate us. They want to bring us down so they can create a world where their brand of Islamic fundamentalism is the law. We stand in the way of that. They hate us for who we are and nothing we say or do (or should say or do) is going to change their visceral hatred of anyone (including other Muslims) that don't ascribe to their beliefs. We virtually ignored the attack in 1993 and so left ourselves open for 9-11.
No one in power should be common. My experience with the common, non-educated, man is not encouraging.
I don't think there's hardly been anyone in the presidency this last century that was "common" or uneducated. Most have either been born into wealthy families or at least ones with connections or there's no way they would have had the financial support to be elected. That despite how almost all like to pretend they came from 'regular folk.' I think perhaps you'd be happier in a country with a autocracy or perhaps a absolute monarchy ruling. Can't get more elitist that someone born to the throne and that way you don't have to worry about all those "common folk" having a say-so.
There are a large number of people who have been privileged to live at a time of peace where we were too young to serve in Vietnam and too old to enlist in the Gulf war. I'll ask the same of you since you're are so rude and I hoped you served if you expect everyone else to. And if you feel than only someone who has served can know how it is, then I expect you to vote for McCain, because Obama has not. So by your own logic you are saying he doesn't know enough to make such a decision.
I see a whole LOT of people that claim they care about the soldiers, but then want to pull them out and abandon Iraq. You cannot claim to support the soldier and then disrespect their mission. I've had relatives deployed in the Gulf. The soldiers, former and current, that I've had the privilege to speak to or hear speak WANT to finish the job. They can see the goal and know what will happen if we unilaterally pull out.
McCain's probably gone through some of the worst things a soldier can. You don't see him calling to abandon the war and he knows the tragedy first hand.
When I said that powerful dark forces will be at work, why did you think I was referring to the Republicans? (Oh, wait...)
There's a lot of people still out there than think Bush planned 9-11.
There are whole countries that would like to see the Republicans back in power, as well as major global industries.
I don't see that at all except for a handful. There are many more countries that want to see us taken down a notch and having someone who leans more towards socialism the better. And despite the verbal attacks on large businesses, especially oil right now and soon, the pharmaceutical again, there is little democrats will do and they certainly don't look out for US businesses anymore. To believe most global corporations are concerned about the democratic party--now that would be naive. Donations from corporate giants flow into the pockets of both parties. Generally all the democrats do is to "tax" the business. Which simply means the business raises it's prices on us. Businesses don't pay taxes--the consumer does.
Oooo, Storm botnet? Sounds nasty. Shouldn't you be taking penicillin for that?
[g]
The best recent example (the book was written in 1989) is America's reaction to the 9/11 attacks. More people died of hunger that day than were killed in the attack.
In the US? I'm calling BS on that one unless you have some stats that prove otherwise. The most commonly used number is 24,000 world-wide which the vast amount is going to be in 3rd world countries. And you can hardly compare the effect on having 3,000+ of your countrymen killed vs. a worldwide, mostly anonymous group of people. And this was the largest attack on our homeland since Pearl Harbor. Had it happened later in the day, even more would have died.
The US response to the attacks was totally illogical because people felt threatened and this caused them to stop using the higher levels of their brains.
So-called "higher levels of their brains" simply suggests that you then turn around and reason with those who attacked you. (And this is WHY most Americans don't trust democrats when it comes to national security.) That's like being bitten by a snake. I do not turn around and reason with the snake. I cut its head off.
I might remind you that the "intellectual classes" are the FIRST people who are off'd after a military coup. Not because of their intelligence, but because they are quick and easy prey who only realize their mistake when it's too late. Stalin called them "useful idiots." OTOH, those so-called "reptilian flight or fight" instincts have a lot to be said for and have kept our butts alive for millions of years.
Unfortunately, I think there are going to be powerful dark forces at work to try get the Republicans back in again.
I can't believe this was modded up as 5 insightful unless you're into tin foil hats and seeing black helicopters everywhere. Sorry, but I get really irritated at the idea that EITHER party would perpetuate an attack on their own people just to get elected. That's beyond the pale.
People are easily swayed. Another terrorist attack in the USA I think could sway the elections.
And WHY would it be easily swayed...because perhaps when it comes down to protecting the country the population has more confidence in the republicans to do the job right.
However, there is no way terrorists are going to attack us right now and ensure a victory for McCain. But trust me, if Obama keeps coming across as weak, i.e., wants to negotiate with terrorists, wants to cut and run in Iraq, we WILL be attacked if he's elected. They will attack if our elected leader is seen to be weak.
In a way, this mirrors the Scott Peterson case in California except there was a body. There was some evidence that Scott was involved but nothing definitive. His behavior and his affair raised suspicions. But like this case, the juror saw a defendant who was deceptive.
I would say that placing himself 80 miles away in the bay the day she disappeared and where his wife and child's bodies washed up a few months later was pretty definitive. Just the fact that his alibi was that he went fishing on Christmas Eve and having an 8-month pregnant wife about to deliver their first child made me suspect him early on. NO woman in that state is going to just let hubby go fishing 80 miles away while she prepares for company over Christmas.
I'm not that familiar with this case, but it's not uncommon for the husband to claim the woman abandoned their children for another life. But when examining the wife's character, it turns out extremely unlikely. There's another case, this time a Drew Peterson (a former cop) who's 3rd wife's manner of death has recently been change from accidental to homicide and who's 4th wife has disappeared. He's claiming she ran off with another man. Most, including police, have there doubts. But unless they find the body, they'll probably only be able to charge him with the 3rd wife's death. His manner is also cocky, so I have no doubt he'll trip himself up eventually.
From what I know of this case, Hans Reiser was the last known person to see Nina Reiser. It seems very doubtful that she not only would abandon her children to her ex-husband, but travel to Russia and then never contact her parents. Motive (divorce), means and opportunity were certainly all there along with forensic evidence of her blood. Defense lawyers love to disdain evidence as "circumstantial" but circumstantial evidence simply means there wasn't an eye-witness to the murder and is the type of evidence that makes up most cases.