Yet more proof that the technology industry needs Pete Ashdown to counter the asinine positions pushed by Ted Stevens and (Ashdown's opponent) Orrin Hatch. The nice thing is that even if you can't donate to the campaign, you can still help Pete receive funds by casting an email vote.
Thousands of laws? Um, not quite. From the article:
Legislatures have passed more than 1,000 laws changing access to information
and later in the article:
States passed 616 laws that restricted access -- to government records, databases, meetings and more -- and 284 laws that loosened access. Another 123 laws had either a neutral or mixed effect
The article is informative, and the actual data is compelling enough without going chicken little in the/. headline. . .
Few initiatives exist to get the message out to teachers
SoftwareFor.org is attempting to address just this issue with the Software for Starving Students CDs. We've identified institutional adoption as the key to getting free software to the greatest numbers of students. As such, building bridges to educators is a core initiative for us. Teachers, like everybody else, need to know how F/OSS benefits them.
So in addition to professional packaging and having versions for both Windows and OS X (a must in education), we've developed initiatives to build lesson plans associated with the software. So rather than handing educators a disc and saying, "Here. It's free. Good luck," we're trying to get to the point where we can say, "Here. It's free. And here is how you can use it to teach concept 'x.'"
OK, I know this is a shameless plug for our project, but it's a good project, trying to do good things, and it's on topic -- so a shameless plug might be in order.
Actually, it's the conservative that is most likely to object to this kind of thing, being opposed to big governement intrusion into individual freedoms, etc.
And last I heard, you didn't need to be a mormon or live in Utah to be an ass -- and I know enough mormons and utahns to know that neither one of those things automatically makes you an ass. But a penchant for overgeneralizing might automatically qualify one as an ass . ..
One of the key reasons why Britain is so rich, for example, is because it was willing to carry a debt in the process of expanding, while other countries were not.
Of course, it doesn't hurt to colonize numerous less powerfull nations, systematically remove all profit and natural resources, then "benevolently" grant said colonies their independence when everything of value is gone and they're no longer profitable to the empire. Just ask the Indians and north Africans . ..
Actually, communism is a political/governmental system and socialism is an economic system. Along those lines, democracy is a political/governmental system and capitalism is an economic system.
Do you realize you've made no point whatsoever? You compare using Spray Mount to commuting in a Hummer -- and that's supposed to establish one or the other (or both) is evil. But you've provided no proof of either point. Are you assuming the rest of us will assume you're self-authoritative?
In all the web, you couldn't find a single link -- even to an environmentalist advocacy site to support your arguments? (Information from environmentalist sites might be considered questionable because of bias -- but at least it's something.) Sure, it takes five minutes longer to do that -- but it makes your arguments credible, at least prima facie.
As a side note, using uncivilized words like "shit" and "fucking" are often a sign that the issuer doesn't really have an argument -- the same type of person will usually simply try to "shout down" their opponent when they run out of ideas. You may have a very solid point, but it's impossible for the rest of us to know because of the way you've presented it.
This is clearly an instace where/. should have either mirrored the site in question or at least have given the site administrators forwarning of the coming rush of hits. Oh, wait . ..
Novell never wanted WordPerfect
on
Novell Buys Ximian
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Everybody keeps comparing this to Novell's "disatrous" purchase of WordPerfect -- but that was no disaster. They never wanted WordPerfect; they wanted Groupwise. Wordperfect wasn't interested in selling just Groupwise, so Novell bought the whole she-bang, stripped out Groupwise, then unloaded the rest of it on those poor chumps at Corel. The whole thing actually made a lot of sense for Novell . ..
What I don't understand is this: Hollywood already spends a great deal of time and money to make "airline" versions of most of their major films. I saw Witness on a flight to Japan when I was 13. It was a couple years before I saw it again (at home, on vhs) and found out there was a topless scene. As a young teenage boy, I felt robbed.:) But the point (yes, I have one) is that since the movie studios have already paid the cost of editing a version which is theoretically acceptable to everyone, why not just release that version for rent/sale, much the same way you can buy "radio edit" albums. There's obviously a market for them, and they can provide an edited version far superior to a "scene-skipper" version of an off-the-shelf tape or dvd. There's no way CleanFlicks could compete.
I just don't see how the movie studios would lose on that one.
The first part of any hiring process is the review of resumes. If competition for the job is high, the employer must develop criteria for narrowing the field of resumes to a few interviews. Most, if not all companies use applicable degree as one of their criteria in that situation. More than once I've seen some idiot in HR pass over a more experienced, more qualified candidate becaues he/she didn't have a degree and there was a stack of resumes to go through. Trust me, the HR staffer doesn't understand the alphabet soup of techie qualifications -- and he/she is looking for any reason to eliminate you from the stack of resumes and get that interview list down to 5 (or whatever). Personally, I'd rather not take the chance.
You'll likely never be penalized for having a degree, and it's also likely that some time during your career you'll be rewarded/promoted (in part) because of it.
"I don't have the authority to pen new policies myself, and my supervisor cannot to be counted on to do it either."
This statement is so absolutely typical of K-12 education, it's not even funny -- let me guess your boss, or somebody not far above you in the command structure is a clueless educator, who the district considers "tech savvy" becuase they can use a web browser. The district refuses to hire technical people in true management positions, because only an educator "can truely understand the needs of education." As a result, you spend most of your time cleaning up their messes, teaching them how to right-click or helping them find files that they saved on their hard disk.
But you certainly don't get much of anything useful done because every idea you have has to be approved by a committee -- and that committee can't understand anything remotely technical, even when explained to them in terms a four-year-old should understand. And heaven-forbid you should be given direct authority over technology issues, you only have a CS degree and decades of experience in computing. (Remember, there's absolutely no way you could understand the needs of eduators.)
Man, I'd hate to be in that situation -- it would really suck.
Of course it's very clear to YOU what belongs in.prn -- it's very clear to about 95 percent of people I've met. And not a damn one of them agrees with another. Everybody's interested in "rights" as long as that means protecting and bolstering their personal values. Very few people have any interest in protecting the rights of those with whom they disagree. Conservatives do want you having abortions, liberals don't want you having a gun. Both groups espouse "rights" when they really only want to advance their agenda. Can I blame them? No. Do I agree with their ideas? Sometimes. Do we need limits to our liberties for freedom to work? Absolutely -- but we must be VERY CAREFULL when we start deciding what's right and what's wrong for everybody. These issues are rarely as simple enough to be decided by a three-line post in an online forum.
"In Germany, the Nazis first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then the came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I didn't speak up because I was a protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak for me." --Reverend Martin Niemoeller
>> And certainly not anyone who isn't stuck in academia with their head up their butt. Java is on its way out,
Down with all those idiots in schools!! They think they know everything with those books and they're education!
--> Yeah! Down with the educated masses and their ability to distinguish "their" (the possessive form of "they") from they're (a contraction of "they are").
Slashdot Mirror
Yet more proof that the technology industry needs Pete Ashdown to counter the asinine positions pushed by Ted Stevens and (Ashdown's opponent) Orrin Hatch. The nice thing is that even if you can't donate to the campaign, you can still help Pete receive funds by casting an email vote.
Thousands of laws? Um, not quite. From the article:
and later in the article:
The article is informative, and the actual data is compelling enough without going chicken little in the /. headline. . .
SoftwareFor.org is attempting to address just this issue with the Software for Starving Students CDs. We've identified institutional adoption as the key to getting free software to the greatest numbers of students. As such, building bridges to educators is a core initiative for us. Teachers, like everybody else, need to know how F/OSS benefits them.
So in addition to professional packaging and having versions for both Windows and OS X (a must in education), we've developed initiatives to build lesson plans associated with the software. So rather than handing educators a disc and saying, "Here. It's free. Good luck," we're trying to get to the point where we can say, "Here. It's free. And here is how you can use it to teach concept 'x.'"
OK, I know this is a shameless plug for our project, but it's a good project, trying to do good things, and it's on topic -- so a shameless plug might be in order.
Actually, it's the conservative that is most likely to object to this kind of thing, being opposed to big governement intrusion into individual freedoms, etc.
And last I heard, you didn't need to be a mormon or live in Utah to be an ass -- and I know enough mormons and utahns to know that neither one of those things automatically makes you an ass. But a penchant for overgeneralizing might automatically qualify one as an ass . . .
One of the key reasons why Britain is so rich, for example, is because it was willing to carry a debt in the process of expanding, while other countries were not.
Of course, it doesn't hurt to colonize numerous less powerfull nations, systematically remove all profit and natural resources, then "benevolently" grant said colonies their independence when everything of value is gone and they're no longer profitable to the empire. Just ask the Indians and north Africans . . .
Actually, communism is a political/governmental system and socialism is an economic system. Along those lines, democracy is a political/governmental system and capitalism is an economic system.
Do you realize you've made no point whatsoever? You compare using Spray Mount to commuting in a Hummer -- and that's supposed to establish one or the other (or both) is evil. But you've provided no proof of either point. Are you assuming the rest of us will assume you're self-authoritative?
In all the web, you couldn't find a single link -- even to an environmentalist advocacy site to support your arguments? (Information from environmentalist sites might be considered questionable because of bias -- but at least it's something.) Sure, it takes five minutes longer to do that -- but it makes your arguments credible, at least prima facie.
As a side note, using uncivilized words like "shit" and "fucking" are often a sign that the issuer doesn't really have an argument -- the same type of person will usually simply try to "shout down" their opponent when they run out of ideas. You may have a very solid point, but it's impossible for the rest of us to know because of the way you've presented it.
If you you're looking for cute among the Cali gubenatorial candidates, I'd say Georgy has some, um, stiff competition.
This is clearly an instace where /. should have either mirrored the site in question or at least have given the site administrators forwarning of the coming rush of hits. Oh, wait . . .
Everybody keeps comparing this to Novell's "disatrous" purchase of WordPerfect -- but that was no disaster. They never wanted WordPerfect; they wanted Groupwise. Wordperfect wasn't interested in selling just Groupwise, so Novell bought the whole she-bang, stripped out Groupwise, then unloaded the rest of it on those poor chumps at Corel. The whole thing actually made a lot of sense for Novell . . .
What I don't understand is this: Hollywood already spends a great deal of time and money to make "airline" versions of most of their major films. I saw Witness on a flight to Japan when I was 13. It was a couple years before I saw it again (at home, on vhs) and found out there was a topless scene. As a young teenage boy, I felt robbed. :) But the point (yes, I have one) is that since the movie studios have already paid the cost of editing a version which is theoretically acceptable to everyone, why not just release that version for rent/sale, much the same way you can buy "radio edit" albums. There's obviously a market for them, and they can provide an edited version far superior to a "scene-skipper" version of an off-the-shelf tape or dvd. There's no way CleanFlicks could compete.
I just don't see how the movie studios would lose on that one.
I've been watching the oldest modern human once a year on his "Rockin New Year's Eve" show for as long as I can remember.
The first part of any hiring process is the review of resumes. If competition for the job is high, the employer must develop criteria for narrowing the field of resumes to a few interviews. Most, if not all companies use applicable degree as one of their criteria in that situation. More than once I've seen some idiot in HR pass over a more experienced, more qualified candidate becaues he/she didn't have a degree and there was a stack of resumes to go through. Trust me, the HR staffer doesn't understand the alphabet soup of techie qualifications -- and he/she is looking for any reason to eliminate you from the stack of resumes and get that interview list down to 5 (or whatever). Personally, I'd rather not take the chance.
You'll likely never be penalized for having a degree, and it's also likely that some time during your career you'll be rewarded/promoted (in part) because of it.
"I don't have the authority to pen new policies myself, and my supervisor cannot to be counted on to do it either."
This statement is so absolutely typical of K-12 education, it's not even funny -- let me guess your boss, or somebody not far above you in the command structure is a clueless educator, who the district considers "tech savvy" becuase they can use a web browser. The district refuses to hire technical people in true management positions, because only an educator "can truely understand the needs of education." As a result, you spend most of your time cleaning up their messes, teaching them how to right-click or helping them find files that they saved on their hard disk.
But you certainly don't get much of anything useful done because every idea you have has to be approved by a committee -- and that committee can't understand anything remotely technical, even when explained to them in terms a four-year-old should understand. And heaven-forbid you should be given direct authority over technology issues, you only have a CS degree and decades of experience in computing. (Remember, there's absolutely no way you could understand the needs of eduators.)
Man, I'd hate to be in that situation -- it would really suck.
(Somebody kill me. Now. Please .)
. . . Conservatives DON'T want you having abortions . . .
Of course it's very clear to YOU what belongs in .prn -- it's very clear to about 95 percent of people I've met. And not a damn one of them agrees with another. Everybody's interested in "rights" as long as that means protecting and bolstering their personal values. Very few people have any interest in protecting the rights of those with whom they disagree. Conservatives do want you having abortions, liberals don't want you having a gun. Both groups espouse "rights" when they really only want to advance their agenda. Can I blame them? No. Do I agree with their ideas? Sometimes. Do we need limits to our liberties for freedom to work? Absolutely -- but we must be VERY CAREFULL when we start deciding what's right and what's wrong for everybody. These issues are rarely as simple enough to be decided by a three-line post in an online forum.
"In Germany, the Nazis first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then the came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, but I didn't speak up because I was a protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak for me."
--Reverend Martin Niemoeller
>> And certainly not anyone who isn't stuck in academia with their head up their butt. Java is on its way out, Down with all those idiots in schools!! They think they know everything with those books and they're education! --> Yeah! Down with the educated masses and their ability to distinguish "their" (the possessive form of "they") from they're (a contraction of "they are").