There's an easy way to put this controversy to bed. If someone can get Chuck Norris to do three roundhouse kicks in a row, he'll be teleported back in time to take a look firsthand.
My resume is normally 5+ pages long. Admittedly my BEST stuff is on the first page, but with 20 years of experience, listing my accomplishments in small paragraphs is nearly impossible. Also technical resumes need to have lots of info about past projects and technologies to make it through the HR hurdle.
Certifications are almost manditory now for consulting and contract positions, especially with the government. If you don't have exactly what they want, you aren't even considered for the positions. You may think this is stupid, but it's how 'things get done'.
IMO the only EJB worth talking about other than MAYBE statelss session beans.
However, having said that, I also would like to point out that one of your main problems DOES appear that no one knew how to use them, so any project was doomed to failure from the beginning. You and your team should have probably done a few 'toy' applications first, to get a feel for the technology, then once you've built up a bit of experience, tackle a real project. Of course, this is in the fantasy world where managers actually give you time to come up to steam on technologies.
The tech is too cumbersome and is very hard to get just right, but when done right it's scalable as all get-out. There are also lighter weight ways to implement stuff, like replacing Entity beans with Session Beans fronting Hibernate POJOs, for instance.
Maybe the EJB 3.0 standard will make them more palatable.
Just to be REALLY nit-picky. The United States isn't a democracy (surprise, surprise) it's a republic. A representative establishment where states form the base unit of government representation to the actual populace. A democracy is just what everyone has heard over and over. The Civil War here was also known as the war of states' rights. It's also when the slogan "These United States" actually shifted to "The United States".
If the US was an actual democracy, we wouldn't have this bogus Electoral College BS. It would be a straight popular vote.
Ever tried call screening, or automatic voicemail??
I never answer the phone when it's a number I don't recognize, but I do call screen or check voicemail right after I get it. If it's an emergency, they BETTER leave a message telling me to call right back. (Note: if I'm not there anyway, it still goes to voice mail).
You still have options around picking up the phone w/o knowing who's on the other end.
However, I'm also on the state's do-not-call list and don't give out my cellphone number to anyone I don't want calling, just home land-line goes to non-trusted (read: business) contacts. Voice mail is pretty ubiquitious (sp?) today, so it's not a problem, for me anyway.
How is this very different from the current practice of putting new movie trailers on DVDs now?? I'm annoyed already that some DVDs have 20 min of trailers for movies that have been out for a long time already (since I got the DVD years ago).
I agree completely. Government, in my experience, is particularly change-adverse. The more sudden and large the change, the more push-back you get. By breaking the changes down to palatable SMALL pieces, and an implementation that doesn't impact existing systems except where absolutely necessary, you can implement the system before anyone realized that it's actually a CHANGE, not an ENHANCEMENT.
Grandiose projects are pretty much doomed to failure from the beginning, unless they can be granularized down to decoupled, independent activities/projects.
As another midwesterner, I agree with the g'parent post. How can someone vote for a president with arguably the WORST record on any subject in U.S. history continues to mystify me.
Many midwesterners have seemingly turned into sheeple, not thinking about long-term consequences
I don't remember saying that anonymity was REQUIRED for free speech. What I meant is that the AVAILABILITY of anonymity, if desired, is necessary for free speech. There are a number of people/organizations that are quite proud of the message they put out. There are others with less power, political clout, or money that choose to say unpopular things anonymously so that they don't get 'squashed' by those not liking their position.
You SHOULD be protected by the government, as we are in the U.S. but that doesn't completely prevent reprisals. Being right and dead, still means being dead. And history is written by those that win/survive. If you're going to be a martyr for the cause, make DAMN sure it's the right cause, you only get to be a martyr once.
Not everyone has the moral fortitude to risk themselves, or more importantly, their family, friends, or other significant people in their lives to express their dissenting opinions. That doesn't mean that those opinions shouldn't be expressed, but are better expressed anonymously 'to protect the innocent' as the old Dragnet motto goes.
Reprisals don't necessarily come from the government. Just because the government doesn't crack down on dissenting opinions, doesn't mean other groups or individuals don't. The call for anonymity protects the speaker from ALL sources of reprisals. The witness protection program, from organized crime reprisals. The whistleblower program (government protection for those uncovering corruption and/or misdeeds in the government processes) protect the person coming forward. News reporters protecting their sources is an old and honored practice, to prevent these sources from being endangered by 'forcing' them public. All of these are non-governmental persecution on free speech.
Free speech is more than complaining about the government, it's the ability to say dissenting opinions about any subject. Individuals and groups unfortunately, respond with violence against these people that are publicly identified with their speech and/or policies. (Think presidental assassinations, the assassination of Martin Luthor King, Bobby Kennedy, many Equal Rights speakers during the 60's, church burnings, random killing of openly gay individuals, bombings of Planned Parenthood clinics, the list goes on.) Unpopular opinions can get one killed. Without anonymity, most of these people afraid for their safety would simply shut up.
TRUE free speech requires anonymity, to prevent reprisals from the government or other parties that disagree with the speech. It's the same reason that we have anonymous voting. If you had to put your name and address on your ballot, then someone outside the voting area could use your past record against you to 'influence' you (usually with a heavy object or projectile weapon). They also have a list of people to deal with before they get the chance to vote in the next election.
Yes, we may get a high noise-to-signal ratio by allowing ANYONE to say things and be anonymous, but otherwise we would end up with only those people speaking the party propaganda actually safe from harm. (Think PRAVDA, or other Soviet-era news outlets).
And 'filtering' free speech, by definition, makes it non-free.
Ok, this is the silliest statement I've seen all day. IF we don't exist, who is left to care if our superchickens all die off in the first year or not?? A problem is only a problem if someone cares about it.
Except for the fact that according to all posted statistics, the RIAA companies are making MORE money per year since swapping became an issue. It's free advertisement for them and more profits in the end. But they still play it as they are losing money when last year they earned over $10 billion. Up from the year before even.
Didn't you hear?!?? You can escape the event horizon according to Hawking, at least if you're very 'light'. (Get it???! Light,.. photons/energy, aaw, never mind.)
Re:Changed the view of the US?
on
Bobby Fischer Found
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
You might think about Nascar racing as an intellectual sport, if you get past the redneck stereotypes. Calculating pit times, average speeds, fuel consumption, drafting to save fuel, remaining laps, average lap speed, etc, etc, etc,..
It's amazing how much skullwork goes into planning and managing a driver in a race.
Slashdot Mirror
Fine, so what's your favorite color then??
There's an easy way to put this controversy to bed. If someone can get Chuck Norris to do three roundhouse kicks in a row, he'll be teleported back in time to take a look firsthand.
I'm still waiting for them to perfect the 'wifery' stuff first. That'll be the life, being able to manage the missus.
My resume is normally 5+ pages long. Admittedly my BEST stuff is on the first page, but with 20 years of experience, listing my accomplishments in small paragraphs is nearly impossible. Also technical resumes need to have lots of info about past projects and technologies to make it through the HR hurdle.
Certifications are almost manditory now for consulting and contract positions, especially with the government. If you don't have exactly what they want, you aren't even considered for the positions. You may think this is stupid, but it's how 'things get done'.
Three Words. Message Driven Beans.
IMO the only EJB worth talking about other than MAYBE statelss session beans.
However, having said that, I also would like to point out that one of your main problems DOES appear that no one knew how to use them, so any project was doomed to failure from the beginning. You and your team should have probably done a few 'toy' applications first, to get a feel for the technology, then once you've built up a bit of experience, tackle a real project. Of course, this is in the fantasy world where managers actually give you time to come up to steam on technologies.
The tech is too cumbersome and is very hard to get just right, but when done right it's scalable as all get-out. There are also lighter weight ways to implement stuff, like replacing Entity beans with Session Beans fronting Hibernate POJOs, for instance.
Maybe the EJB 3.0 standard will make them more palatable.
Just to be REALLY nit-picky. The United States isn't a democracy (surprise, surprise) it's a republic. A representative establishment where states form the base unit of government representation to the actual populace. A democracy is just what everyone has heard over and over. The Civil War here was also known as the war of states' rights. It's also when the slogan "These United States" actually shifted to "The United States".
If the US was an actual democracy, we wouldn't have this bogus Electoral College BS. It would be a straight popular vote.
Ever tried call screening, or automatic voicemail??
I never answer the phone when it's a number I don't recognize, but I do call screen or check voicemail right after I get it. If it's an emergency, they BETTER leave a message telling me to call right back. (Note: if I'm not there anyway, it still goes to voice mail).
You still have options around picking up the phone w/o knowing who's on the other end.
However, I'm also on the state's do-not-call list and don't give out my cellphone number to anyone I don't want calling, just home land-line goes to non-trusted (read: business) contacts. Voice mail is pretty ubiquitious (sp?) today, so it's not a problem, for me anyway.
Given the choice?? Sure!!
How is this very different from the current practice of putting new movie trailers on DVDs now?? I'm annoyed already that some DVDs have 20 min of trailers for movies that have been out for a long time already (since I got the DVD years ago).
Same concept, same result. Annoying.
Isn't that a redundant statement?? Maybe by reducing redundancy you can reduce the redundent reductions.
I agree completely. Government, in my experience, is particularly change-adverse. The more sudden and large the change, the more push-back you get. By breaking the changes down to palatable SMALL pieces, and an implementation that doesn't impact existing systems except where absolutely necessary, you can implement the system before anyone realized that it's actually a CHANGE, not an ENHANCEMENT.
Grandiose projects are pretty much doomed to failure from the beginning, unless they can be granularized down to decoupled, independent activities/projects.
Aaaughh,.. (Drool). Marry me!
Don't forget, "Most Honest Politician"
I came up with that proof the other day, but I'm looking into copyrighting it before I release it.
As another midwesterner, I agree with the g'parent post. How can someone vote for a president with arguably the WORST record on any subject in U.S. history continues to mystify me.
Many midwesterners have seemingly turned into sheeple, not thinking about long-term consequences
I don't remember saying that anonymity was REQUIRED for free speech. What I meant is that the AVAILABILITY of anonymity, if desired, is necessary for free speech. There are a number of people/organizations that are quite proud of the message they put out. There are others with less power, political clout, or money that choose to say unpopular things anonymously so that they don't get 'squashed' by those not liking their position.
You SHOULD be protected by the government, as we are in the U.S. but that doesn't completely prevent reprisals. Being right and dead, still means being dead. And history is written by those that win/survive. If you're going to be a martyr for the cause, make DAMN sure it's the right cause, you only get to be a martyr once.
Not everyone has the moral fortitude to risk themselves, or more importantly, their family, friends, or other significant people in their lives to express their dissenting opinions. That doesn't mean that those opinions shouldn't be expressed, but are better expressed anonymously 'to protect the innocent' as the old Dragnet motto goes.
Reprisals don't necessarily come from the government. Just because the government doesn't crack down on dissenting opinions, doesn't mean other groups or individuals don't. The call for anonymity protects the speaker from ALL sources of reprisals. The witness protection program, from organized crime reprisals. The whistleblower program (government protection for those uncovering corruption and/or misdeeds in the government processes) protect the person coming forward. News reporters protecting their sources is an old and honored practice, to prevent these sources from being endangered by 'forcing' them public. All of these are non-governmental persecution on free speech.
Free speech is more than complaining about the government, it's the ability to say dissenting opinions about any subject. Individuals and groups unfortunately, respond with violence against these people that are publicly identified with their speech and/or policies. (Think presidental assassinations, the assassination of Martin Luthor King, Bobby Kennedy, many Equal Rights speakers during the 60's, church burnings, random killing of openly gay individuals, bombings of Planned Parenthood clinics, the list goes on.) Unpopular opinions can get one killed. Without anonymity, most of these people afraid for their safety would simply shut up.
TRUE free speech requires anonymity, to prevent reprisals from the government or other parties that disagree with the speech. It's the same reason that we have anonymous voting. If you had to put your name and address on your ballot, then someone outside the voting area could use your past record against you to 'influence' you (usually with a heavy object or projectile weapon). They also have a list of people to deal with before they get the chance to vote in the next election.
Yes, we may get a high noise-to-signal ratio by allowing ANYONE to say things and be anonymous, but otherwise we would end up with only those people speaking the party propaganda actually safe from harm. (Think PRAVDA, or other Soviet-era news outlets).
And 'filtering' free speech, by definition, makes it non-free.
Ok, this is the silliest statement I've seen all day. IF we don't exist, who is left to care if our superchickens all die off in the first year or not?? A problem is only a problem if someone cares about it.
Except for the fact that according to all posted statistics, the RIAA companies are making MORE money per year since swapping became an issue. It's free advertisement for them and more profits in the end. But they still play it as they are losing money when last year they earned over $10 billion. Up from the year before even.
Actually I'm betting it's a combination of that reference with a Spinal Tap reference myself.
Wish I had mod points today, this one deserves another funny
Didn't you hear?!?? You can escape the event horizon according to Hawking, at least if you're very 'light'. (Get it???! Light,.. photons/energy, aaw, never mind.)
Oh, That is SO five years ago!!
You might think about Nascar racing as an intellectual sport, if you get past the redneck stereotypes. Calculating pit times, average speeds, fuel consumption, drafting to save fuel, remaining laps, average lap speed, etc, etc, etc,..
It's amazing how much skullwork goes into planning and managing a driver in a race.