Re:SCO has another problem too
on
SCO DOS'ed
·
· Score: 1
But the whole point is that, apparently, for some time after knowing (allegedly) that its IP was in Linux, SCO has continued to distribute Linux. Therefore, they have *intentionally* and *knowingly* published, and continue to publish, this code. Never mind that they didn't put it in there: they continued to distribute it.
Most likely, either you or the sender would need to live in Virginia. Generally speaking, the rule is (and this is very approximate, as IANAL) that the person sued must have done *something* that they could reasonably have expected to have placed them under the laws of a given state. Marketing to someone in that state would qualify, connecting directly to a mailserver in that state would probably qualify, bouncing off a mailserver in that state would probably *not* qualify.
It ought to be simple: "I can save you a boatload of money on bandwidth to give away the software you can't sell." (No wonder Sun's going down the Toilet.)
I prefer ssh
on
SSH or IPSec?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've had very poor experiences with IPSEC based products - they tend to be more or less flaky. Also, newer versions of ssh have the ability to run a SOCKS4 server (using the -D option) - I then point Mozilla at that (Chimera is my "regular" browser). Between that and X-windows/vnc, i can do everything i need to and don't have to have some nasty,proprietary client. (Furthermore, everything I need is included in the OS - which means I can get in from just about any computer, anywhere with a net connection.)
I think you're on target here about this following the Columbia break-up. The first iteration of the private space race closely followed the challenger blowup - now we're in for another round. Unfortunately, all those companies are now, so far as I know, defunct. (IIRC, it was "Rockets Unlimited" and "Houston Aerospace" -- but I could be very wrong.)
Why bother creating a whole new OS kernel for this? Why not just put together a Linux distribution, compile a statically linked JVM (if you can - do they still make the JDK source available?) and have nothing but a kernel and a jvm binary?
That would give you all the drivers for free, and you would have a stable and proven reliable operating system instead.
I particularly like Budget. Unlike GnuCash, Quicken, and MoneyDance the last time I tried it, it actually makes budgeting the central feature of the program rather than an afterthought. This is the foundation of managing your finances.
Let's face it... if you just want to balance your checkbook, you can do that in a spreadsheet.
I own Ruby in a Nutshell and Programming Ruby. For the most part, I agree with his assessment. Ruby in a Nutshell was originally published in Japanese only. My impression is that it was translated by someone with limited experience; everything is syntactically correct, but the writing style is wooden and it's just not a very interesting read.
However, I think the Practical Programmers' book is much better than you give it credit for. It does a credible job of introducing an experienced programmer to the Ruby Language (although it's really not for those who are not familiar with an Object-Oriented Language). I have found that that is my standard Ruby resource.
Incidentally, I only picked up Ruby a few months ago, and have found it to be a great language. Unfortunately, some of the support is not yet there. I've ended up doing my latest project in Java because I don't want to lock myself into a language that will not support high-end scalability features.
Re:Christianity and Irrationality
on
Easter Humor
·
· Score: 1
My guess is that you want something that "feels" good because it allows you to justify the majority of your actions? Christianity is pretty much a big book of decent rules of thumb, along with its own agenda. But you can certainly live by Christian rules of thumb ("it tends to pay off to be civil to people, regardles of how they act toward you", etc) without adding in the extra crap associated with Christianity.
I think that your view here -- that Christian ethics tend to justify Christian presumptions -- comes more from a perversion of Christianity than from the real thing. You seem to be reacting to a kind of Ned-Flandersish view of Christianity, where Christians are those people who always do everything right; they are the upright, moral people looking down on all the shit-classes.
While I can certainly see how you would get that view from Christianity in America today, I don't think it lives up to the Christian moral vision. Let's face it - Christianity is a religion founded by a bunch of convicted criminals. At least six of the New Testament books were written from jail, and the two longest (Luke/Acts) may have been written as defense briefs! If most Christians wouldn't have anything to do with a criminal, can we really say that they are following in the footsteps of Jesus? Not everything that quacks like a duck is a duck.
For me, Christian ethics is something that continually confronts me with my own failings. It requires (and I expend) enormous effort to avoid watering it down, making it practical.
Husbands love your wife as Christ loved the church -- Ephesians 5. Do I really love my wife enough to die for her?
Submit to authority -- even when it's NOT good -- John 18.35 (or somewhere aroundd there). Can I really do that?
Do not repay evil for evil - Matthew 5, Romans 15. Can I REALLY turn the other cheek?
Love God. do I really love God as much as I love myself?
"In Christ, there is neither male nor female, slave nor free, Jew nor Greek" (Galatians 1:something). Can I really love people who are not from my social caste, not of my gender, not of my culture? Can I welcome into fellowship the people who don't look like Ned Flanders?
Let me tell you something... I can't say that I succeed at any of the above. In fact, I can't think of any that I really do keep. But I *try* - because that is the closest to loving God I can get. And it is the effort that gives life meaning. So... I can't argue that the description you give may be true for many American Christians (especially the loud ones who don't read their Bible as much as they quote it.) But I don't think it can explain a St. Frances or a Martin Luther King.
What I've found is that it's not so important how much you budget as knowing how much you budget. If you're like I was, you probably run your checkbook on a "I think I have about *this* much" basis, and certainly have no budgeting in place. I tried for years to use Quicken and the like, but they don't fit the way I think. Not too long ago, I started using Budget from www.snowmintcs.com. This implements the old "Envelope Budgeting" system in software.
The idea is that you have a set of envelopes representing each budget category, then you allocate money to each category when you get paid. It's all pretty automated. The software is, unfortunately, somewhat rough around the edges sometimes, but it works (and is much better than Quicken/Mac). Support is great.
Also, you can find a budget categories calculator at http://www.crown.org/Tools/budgetguide.asp
. While it is Christian-based, the categories are not really much different
because of that. (Which, unfortunately, may say something about the kind of "Christianity" espoused.)
Re:Rabbit! Tasty!
on
Easter Humor
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
It's it strange how one concept can be hated on both sides of the fence for totally opposite reasons?
Indeed.:)
I see santa as a way to indoctrinate kids with the belief that there is an all powerful being that judges whether they have been good or bad, and rewards or punishes them accordingly. Sorta like training wheels for later life when they fear the judgement of the god/afterlife fantasy, instead of developing an independant system of ethics to guide their choices.
Possibly. However, I have to say that in part, I am a Christian not because I was indoctrinated from an early age (I wasn't) but because I am not convinced that a sensible ethical code can be formulated without some kind of teleological (that is, losely speaking, goal-centered) foundation. In order to answer the question of "what is right" or "what should I do", one must first figure out what they are trying to accomplish. Then, having figured out what is right, we must then figure out how to accomplish it. Any ethical system needs to be evaluated according to these three questions: What should I do, Why should I want to, and how will I be able to?
So far, I have not seen any non-religious ethical system that can answer the latter two questions. Humanism tries, but fails: why should I care about the good of humanity? And, in case you haven't noticed lately, the secularization of human services under the banner of government has not given the wonderful results promised. (Go down to the 'hood sometime and see all the parentless children if you don't believe me. They were there before, they are there now. But there may be more now. "The poor will be with you always.")
As a Christian, I can answer these last two questions, but probably not in the way you expect. My answers are as follows:
What to do? What God tells me to.
Why? Because I love God, because he is good and just. Yes, I really feel that way. (And yes, I'm familiar with the gazillion old testament examples that you might feel inclined to cite.)
How? With his power, and with the assurance that if I sacrifice my welfare in this life, I need not worry because I can look forward to something better in the next.
Christian ethics call for a profoundly unworldly viewpoint -- one that says "money doesn't matter, stuff doesn't matter, heaven knows that war on iraq doesn't matter: only God matters" -- and this viewpoint will ALWAYS be unpopular. When Christian ethics becomes trite, as in the formulation you gave in your post, is when it is watered down in an attempt to make it practical for people who *don't* love God more than their own life. Is it really surprising that it fails in such cases?
This has nothing to do with church history. It has to do with human history. The history of the Easter holiday [holiday.com]
How on earth does it have nothing do with church history? Good grief - your contention is that the church took over your holidays to force our religion on you, and you think that has nothing to do with church history???
The first time I go a week without hearing how evil I must be for choosing not to be christian is the week become less of a jackass.
Great - so because some Christians are jackasses you're going to join them? (I never told you how evil you were for not being a Christian - I told you how evil Christians were for not being serious about their faith.)
I should probably mention, however, that I am perfectly aware of the origins of the name "Easter" - yet, that is another case of paganism polluting Christianity, not the other way around.
Re:Rabbit! Tasty!
on
Easter Humor
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Why stupid? Christmas is just a bunch of pagan celebrations (Winter Solstice, etc.) misapproprated by christians for their own use in forcing their beliefs on the general public. Think Easter is any different?
Guarantee you I know more church history than you do, and I think you are more or less full of it. For example, Easter is timed to coincide (more or less) with the Jewish passover, not the Vernal Equinox. The Celts tried to change easter to more closely match the vernal equinox (more or less - at least that was what the Roman church assumed) and very nearly got inderdicted for it. Christmas, on the other hand, you have a case.
However, as far as "forcing beliefs" on people - you are a bit of a jackass, aren't you? Do you honestly think that you celebrating the easter bunny forces MY beliefs on YOU? How 'bout when they teach my children about Santa Claus in the public schools? Who is having beliefs forced on them?
Every year for easter, I have rabbit for dinner. Sometimes stewed, sometimes BBQ'd. I explain to my kids that we are "eating the easter bunny". (This is my one touch of right-wing Christian reactionary - I can't stand the silliness that is indulged in the name of "celebrating" Christian holidays. I hate Satan "I do not exist" Claus, and I DESPISE the "easter bunny." If you wanna be a pagan, fine - not my business - but for those who claim to be Christian to celebrate the most holy-days of our faith with pagan nonsense is stupid.)
Recently, I got the O'Reilly Struts book. I was astonished to see that all the screen shots were taken on Windows! Now, this may not seem absurd to the younger generation, but I was reared on O'Reilly books that were decidedly... non-Windows oriented. Yes, you could use Windows, but only to get to a Real Computer. A Real Computer, of course, was one that ran UUCP out of the box. Anyway, I was surprised. Suppose it was foolish of me to be, but I was.
it looks like your using a nix derivitave already, just try postgres on your existing server (or if you can, setup a new one), and test the heck out if it. I can't provide any insight into problems, cause I don't have any access-postgres databases running right now.
One that I know will be an issue is that, out of the box, auto-increment fields won't work. This is fairly easily fixed, or just run MySQL instead.
I've been a full-time telecommuter for almost three years now. A few tips.
Definitely get a separate line. In my case, I got a cell phone and that number is the only number I make available in the company directory. (Sometimes, I use our land line for dialing in to phone conferences etc., but I only accept calls on the cell.
Definitely try to find somewhere to work other than home. I've found that, after a while "these four walls" get depressing -- I need a change of pace. This is part of why I use a cell phone for everything. The biggest challenge is remote Internet access - my work more or less requires me to be constantly connected. Currently, I have access to the Internet at my church. Libraries are also good.
Your success in this will depend greatly on finding someone "local" at your employer who will make sure you stay connected. I've had the best luck getting help with this from managers/team leads. However, it can be a coworker. This person needs to be someone who will take an interest in making sure you know what you need to know to stay productive.
Make sure you have more than one way to get remote access to your company. Employers tend to be unsympathetic when you don't work all day because the VPN server was down.
Number 3 is the most important criteria. The rest is just technical details.
First, I ahve to agree with the post in reply to your post: if breastfeeding continues to hurt greatly, that is a medical issue, and you should see the appropriate doctor. With our first breast-fed child, my wife had some serious pain. She went to the family doctor three times, and was given a bunch of bs that boiled down to "why don't you just ween the kid, granola freak." (We have since fired that doctor.) We told our pediatrician about this, she took one look at my wife's breast, then said "you have a yeast infection in your milk duct. I can't write a script for you because my insurance company will scream, but go to the drugstore and put some monistat on it. If this doesn't fix it, call me and we'll get you a better doctor." It fixed it.
In agreement with the previous post, it's a good idea to find a good nursing consultant. However, these are hard to find. Especially, make damn sure your pediatrician agrees with your views, or you will be up the proverbial creek. (It is unlikely that your family doctor or ob will be much help.)
As far as depression: as someone who knows a bit about depression (pastoring and general experience, including my wife) I can tell you that to talk about some breast-feeding guilt-trip or any other non-organic cause "causing" depression in a new mother is just dumb. It is clearly established that women are vulnerable to post-partum depression for several weeks after birth, and this depression once started can continue for months. It is most unlikely that breast-feeding would cause or make this work - it's just a focus for an otherwise endogenous depression.
Opinions vary, but I believe that prozac is your friend. If a woman is depressed, prozac or another SSRI is much more likely to fix the problem than not breast-feeding. In fact, breast-feeding itself releases a variety of feel-good hormones. (This opinion, if you think about it, is enough to show you that I'm not just some bangladesh granola head. I really do think that medicine and chemicals have their place - I just don't think formula should be used except in extreme circumstances. For example, if the mother is a crack addict, use formula -- and that is not a hypothetical example. (Being in the ministry sucks sometimes.))
I've already posted here, but one of those many things I'd forgotten came to my attention: don't even think about bottle feeding. No, I'm serious. Don't.
Here's a few reasons why:
Breast is best. No, really, it is. Even the formula companies, in their advertisements, have to admit that breast feeding is by far the best thing for your kids. Breast-fed babies get sick a lot less (I have twin two-year olds that have only been sick with colds/ear infections twice -- bottle-fed babies seem sick all the time, especially if they are in day care.) There's also conclusive evidence that breast-fed babies are more emotionally stable, and some reason to be that they are on average smarter. Also, there are a few chronic diseases (such as Krohn's disease) that breast-fed children just don't get. These last for a lifetime.
Breast is easiest. Visualize a two AM feeding. Now, at one two-AM feeding, you have to go downstairs, get out the formula, find a bottle, clean a bottle (if your house is like mine), warm a bottle, hold the bottle while the baby eats, burb the baby, clean up where the baby spit up all over you because bottle-fed babies puke more, and finally, an hour later, go back to bed. Don't forget that the baby is screaming the whole time cause he has colic because you're bottle-feeding. At the other two-AM feeding, you get the baby out their crib, walk her to the bed, where your naked wife sleepily takes the baby in her arms and feeds her. The baby barely wakes up, and the mother barely wakes up, and you are back in bed in less than five minutes. You can then, 15 minutes later, return the baby to the crib if you must, but it's really not a big deal.
You will be denying income to some seriously evil corporations that do things like giving free samples of formula to third-world mothers, then letting the babies starve when the samples run out and the third-world people can't afford more.
Your pediatrician will thank you. (None of your other doctors will care, but your pediatrician will.)
Your wife will tend to lose baby weight much more quickly. Also, Breast-feeding produces a hormone that contracts muscles in the lower abdomen stretched by pregnancy. Short form - yum.
Did I mention that the pregnancy breasts stick around longer? Yum.
Breast milk is tasty, especially warm. yum.
Breast-milk comes in shapely, reusable containers.
Formula is *expensive*.
If it's so good, why don't more people do it?
In the 20's and 30's, it was stylish not to breast feed. Breast-feeding was considered low-class.
There was some serious hubris starting in the thirties that said that we could out-do nature and that breast milk was better for the baby. This is conclusively disproved.
Silly victorian body modesty.
Grandma bottle-fed, and is libel to be offended if you tell her that what she did wasn't best. People get seriously offended about this. Tell 'em to go to hell.
Did I mention that the formula companies spend a lot on advertising? Seriously, when you go the hospital, even if you're breast-feeding, you will be baraged with promotional junk provided by the formula companies. If you do not have a good pediatrician, you will get it there too.
Formula is free at first. Kind of like cocaine.
Breast-feeding *hurts* for the first week or so. This can't be denied. Trust me: it does get better.
Anyway, there's my rant. This is based on four children worth of experience, breast and bottle fed.
Let me start with my "qualifications": I have four kids, aged one to five. While I cannot claim to know everything, I think I do have some idea what you're in for. As a part-time pastor, I've also seen more than a little bit of what goes wrong in marriages. Here are a few tips:
Remembers why you had kids in the first place. I think a lot of people go into having kids with the vague idea that it will be "fun", and then don't have a good foundation when it turns out to be a lot of work. Having kids isn't fun - it's the creation of a new person. These are not pets, they're people, and for that reason their value cannot be reckoned.
I would strongly recommend that you consider whether having two incomes is worth it. The bottom line is that, when all the accounting is done, it rarely pays to have two incomes. First, decent daycare is expensive - for anything worth having, at least $700-1000/month/child. Second, there are many hidden expenses of working - how often do you eat out because everyone's too tired to cook? How much do work clothes cost? The net effect is that I'm not sure many families make any more money by both working unless they have very special skills (i.e. doctor,lawyer,etc) or have free childcare.
The good news: your kids won't be little forever. Hang in there.
The bad news: your kids won't be little forever. Don't squander the terrible twos sitting in front of the TV or the playstation.
Get your finances in order. Yes, really. The best thing you can do for your kids is have a good marriage (divorce devastates kids, and anyone who says otherwise is deluded.) And the first best thing you can do for your marriage is to have your finances in order. This doesn't mean making a lot of money, it means not spending money you don't have. If you don't have a budget, make one: http://www.snowmintcs.com/ offers some good software to help.
As soon as the baby's old enough, arrange a date-night at least once a month. (Typically, "old enough" is about six weeks.) This follows from the previous: the second best thing you can do for your marriage is to spend time together away from the kids. And don't forget to have fun: this shouldn't be a time to bitch about money.
Following the previous two: if your marriage starts to fall apart, do whatever it takes to stop that. If that means quitting your job and being home, do it -- there's always welfare. Don't wait for the divorce notice to start working on your marriage. (And, oh yes, run like hell from adultery before it happens to you.)
If someone decides to stay home with the kids, the YMCA is your friend. I'm not sure how common this is, but here the YMCA (1) gives membership to anyone, even if they can't pay and (2) has free childcare while you work out. The time away from the kids is important.
One thing worth noting: most of the things kids really need cannot be bought, and most of the things that are really good for them are free. A public playground is good for kids on about sixteen million levels - and that $20 toy will be busted within a week.
This is a team effort: get as much help from the family as you can. But this is your responsility, don't let grandma run your kid's life.
Discipline early and often, and consistently. How you discipline (i.e. spanking or not) is not nearly as important as being consistent. A book called 1-2-3 Magic offers an excellent start on a good pattern of discipline. Also, if you wait until the kids are three or four to start disciplining, you're doomed. Start when they start crawling and they will grow into it.
Most importantly: the goal of child-rearing is not always a happy kid. It's a happy, productive adult. Sometimes, the kid needs to cry today to smile tomorrow.
Okay, there's more to say but that's all that comes to mind.:) Good luck, and don't forget your priorities: first, your marriage, then your children, then yourself.
I often see this attitude from techies... you have to understand that the law has no problem dealing with subjective realities and inductive reasoning. In fact, the law is founded on both. Very often, the law has to make very subjective judgments regarding intent, etc. and that's OK.
And, yes, deception *should* be illegal. In fact, it's always been illegal in many contexts -- they call them "cons". Why shouldn't it be illegal here?
Slashdot Mirror
But the whole point is that, apparently, for some time after knowing (allegedly) that its IP was in Linux, SCO has continued to distribute Linux. Therefore, they have *intentionally* and *knowingly* published, and continue to publish, this code. Never mind that they didn't put it in there: they continued to distribute it.
Most likely, either you or the sender would need to live in Virginia. Generally speaking, the rule is (and this is very approximate, as IANAL) that the person sued must have done *something* that they could reasonably have expected to have placed them under the laws of a given state. Marketing to someone in that state would qualify, connecting directly to a mailserver in that state would probably qualify, bouncing off a mailserver in that state would probably *not* qualify.
It ought to be simple: "I can save you a boatload of money on bandwidth to give away the software you can't sell." (No wonder Sun's going down the Toilet.)
I've had very poor experiences with IPSEC based products - they tend to be more or less flaky. Also, newer versions of ssh have the ability to run a SOCKS4 server (using the -D option) - I then point Mozilla at that (Chimera is my "regular" browser). Between that and X-windows/vnc, i can do everything i need to and don't have to have some nasty,proprietary client. (Furthermore, everything I need is included in the OS - which means I can get in from just about any computer, anywhere with a net connection.)
Can you say "bit torrent"?
I think you're on target here about this following the Columbia break-up. The first iteration of the private space race closely followed the challenger blowup - now we're in for another round. Unfortunately, all those companies are now, so far as I know, defunct. (IIRC, it was "Rockets Unlimited" and "Houston Aerospace" -- but I could be very wrong.)
That would give you all the drivers for free, and you would have a stable and proven reliable operating system instead.
Let's face it... if you just want to balance your checkbook, you can do that in a spreadsheet.
However, I think the Practical Programmers' book is much better than you give it credit for. It does a credible job of introducing an experienced programmer to the Ruby Language (although it's really not for those who are not familiar with an Object-Oriented Language). I have found that that is my standard Ruby resource.
Incidentally, I only picked up Ruby a few months ago, and have found it to be a great language. Unfortunately, some of the support is not yet there. I've ended up doing my latest project in Java because I don't want to lock myself into a language that will not support high-end scalability features.
While I can certainly see how you would get that view from Christianity in America today, I don't think it lives up to the Christian moral vision. Let's face it - Christianity is a religion founded by a bunch of convicted criminals. At least six of the New Testament books were written from jail, and the two longest (Luke/Acts) may have been written as defense briefs! If most Christians wouldn't have anything to do with a criminal, can we really say that they are following in the footsteps of Jesus? Not everything that quacks like a duck is a duck.
For me, Christian ethics is something that continually confronts me with my own failings. It requires (and I expend) enormous effort to avoid watering it down, making it practical.
Let me tell you somethingThe idea is that you have a set of envelopes representing each budget category, then you allocate money to each category when you get paid. It's all pretty automated. The software is, unfortunately, somewhat rough around the edges sometimes, but it works (and is much better than Quicken/Mac). Support is great.
Also, you can find a budget categories calculator at http://www.crown.org/Tools/budgetguide.asp . While it is Christian-based, the categories are not really much different because of that. (Which, unfortunately, may say something about the kind of "Christianity" espoused.)
So far, I have not seen any non-religious ethical system that can answer the latter two questions. Humanism tries, but fails: why should I care about the good of humanity? And, in case you haven't noticed lately, the secularization of human services under the banner of government has not given the wonderful results promised. (Go down to the 'hood sometime and see all the parentless children if you don't believe me. They were there before, they are there now. But there may be more now. "The poor will be with you always.")
As a Christian, I can answer these last two questions, but probably not in the way you expect. My answers are as follows:
- What to do? What God tells me to.
- Why? Because I love God, because he is good and just. Yes, I really feel that way. (And yes, I'm familiar with the gazillion old testament examples that you might feel inclined to cite.)
- How? With his power, and with the assurance that if I sacrifice my welfare in this life, I need not worry because I can look forward to something better in the next.
Christian ethics call for a profoundly unworldly viewpoint -- one that says "money doesn't matter, stuff doesn't matter, heaven knows that war on iraq doesn't matter: only God matters" -- and this viewpoint will ALWAYS be unpopular. When Christian ethics becomes trite, as in the formulation you gave in your post, is when it is watered down in an attempt to make it practical for people who *don't* love God more than their own life. Is it really surprising that it fails in such cases?I should probably mention, however, that I am perfectly aware of the origins of the name "Easter" - yet, that is another case of paganism polluting Christianity, not the other way around.
However, as far as "forcing beliefs" on people - you are a bit of a jackass, aren't you? Do you honestly think that you celebrating the easter bunny forces MY beliefs on YOU? How 'bout when they teach my children about Santa Claus in the public schools? Who is having beliefs forced on them?
Every year for easter, I have rabbit for dinner. Sometimes stewed, sometimes BBQ'd. I explain to my kids that we are "eating the easter bunny". (This is my one touch of right-wing Christian reactionary - I can't stand the silliness that is indulged in the name of "celebrating" Christian holidays. I hate Satan "I do not exist" Claus, and I DESPISE the "easter bunny." If you wanna be a pagan, fine - not my business - but for those who claim to be Christian to celebrate the most holy-days of our faith with pagan nonsense is stupid.)
Recently, I got the O'Reilly Struts book. I was astonished to see that all the screen shots were taken on Windows! Now, this may not seem absurd to the younger generation, but I was reared on O'Reilly books that were decidedly ... non-Windows oriented. Yes, you could use Windows, but only to get to a Real Computer. A Real Computer, of course, was one that ran UUCP out of the box. Anyway, I was surprised. Suppose it was foolish of me to be, but I was.
My point was just that, if you export an access table into a postgresql database, auto-increments will not work without some tweaking. Make sense?
- Definitely get a separate line. In my case, I got a cell phone and that number is the only number I make available in the company directory. (Sometimes, I use our land line for dialing in to phone conferences etc., but I only accept calls on the cell.
- Definitely try to find somewhere to work other than home. I've found that, after a while "these four walls" get depressing -- I need a change of pace. This is part of why I use a cell phone for everything. The biggest challenge is remote Internet access - my work more or less requires me to be constantly connected. Currently, I have access to the Internet at my church. Libraries are also good.
- Your success in this will depend greatly on finding someone "local" at your employer who will make sure you stay connected. I've had the best luck getting help with this from managers/team leads. However, it can be a coworker. This person needs to be someone who will take an interest in making sure you know what you need to know to stay productive.
- Make sure you have more than one way to get remote access to your company. Employers tend to be unsympathetic when you don't work all day because the VPN server was down.
Number 3 is the most important criteria. The rest is just technical details.In agreement with the previous post, it's a good idea to find a good nursing consultant. However, these are hard to find. Especially, make damn sure your pediatrician agrees with your views, or you will be up the proverbial creek. (It is unlikely that your family doctor or ob will be much help.)
As far as depression: as someone who knows a bit about depression (pastoring and general experience, including my wife) I can tell you that to talk about some breast-feeding guilt-trip or any other non-organic cause "causing" depression in a new mother is just dumb. It is clearly established that women are vulnerable to post-partum depression for several weeks after birth, and this depression once started can continue for months. It is most unlikely that breast-feeding would cause or make this work - it's just a focus for an otherwise endogenous depression.
Opinions vary, but I believe that prozac is your friend. If a woman is depressed, prozac or another SSRI is much more likely to fix the problem than not breast-feeding. In fact, breast-feeding itself releases a variety of feel-good hormones. (This opinion, if you think about it, is enough to show you that I'm not just some bangladesh granola head. I really do think that medicine and chemicals have their place - I just don't think formula should be used except in extreme circumstances. For example, if the mother is a crack addict, use formula -- and that is not a hypothetical example. (Being in the ministry sucks sometimes.))
Who says I want to? I *enjoy* getting my wife pregnant. (And had a vasectomy last week...)
Here's a few reasons why:
- Breast is best. No, really, it is. Even the formula companies, in their advertisements, have to admit that breast feeding is by far the best thing for your kids. Breast-fed babies get sick a lot less (I have twin two-year olds that have only been sick with colds/ear infections twice -- bottle-fed babies seem sick all the time, especially if they are in day care.) There's also conclusive evidence that breast-fed babies are more emotionally stable, and some reason to be that they are on average smarter. Also, there are a few chronic diseases (such as Krohn's disease) that breast-fed children just don't get. These last for a lifetime.
- Breast is easiest. Visualize a two AM feeding. Now, at one two-AM feeding, you have to go downstairs, get out the formula, find a bottle, clean a bottle (if your house is like mine), warm a bottle, hold the bottle while the baby eats, burb the baby, clean up where the baby spit up all over you because bottle-fed babies puke more, and finally, an hour later, go back to bed. Don't forget that the baby is screaming the whole time cause he has colic because you're bottle-feeding. At the other two-AM feeding, you get the baby out their crib, walk her to the bed, where your naked wife sleepily takes the baby in her arms and feeds her. The baby barely wakes up, and the mother barely wakes up, and you are back in bed in less than five minutes. You can then, 15 minutes later, return the baby to the crib if you must, but it's really not a big deal.
- You will be denying income to some seriously evil corporations that do things like giving free samples of formula to third-world mothers, then letting the babies starve when the samples run out and the third-world people can't afford more.
- Your pediatrician will thank you. (None of your other doctors will care, but your pediatrician will.)
- Your wife will tend to lose baby weight much more quickly. Also, Breast-feeding produces a hormone that contracts muscles in the lower abdomen stretched by pregnancy. Short form - yum.
- Did I mention that the pregnancy breasts stick around longer? Yum.
- Breast milk is tasty, especially warm. yum.
- Breast-milk comes in shapely, reusable containers.
- Formula is *expensive*.
If it's so good, why don't more people do it?- In the 20's and 30's, it was stylish not to breast feed. Breast-feeding was considered low-class.
- There was some serious hubris starting in the thirties that said that we could out-do nature and that breast milk was better for the baby. This is conclusively disproved.
- Silly victorian body modesty.
- Grandma bottle-fed, and is libel to be offended if you tell her that what she did wasn't best. People get seriously offended about this. Tell 'em to go to hell.
- Did I mention that the formula companies spend a lot on advertising? Seriously, when you go the hospital, even if you're breast-feeding, you will be baraged with promotional junk provided by the formula companies. If you do not have a good pediatrician, you will get it there too.
- Formula is free at first. Kind of like cocaine.
- Breast-feeding *hurts* for the first week or so. This can't be denied. Trust me: it does get better.
Anyway, there's my rant. This is based on four children worth of experience, breast and bottle fed.- Remembers why you had kids in the first place. I think a lot of people go into having kids with the vague idea that it will be "fun", and then don't have a good foundation when it turns out to be a lot of work. Having kids isn't fun - it's the creation of a new person. These are not pets, they're people, and for that reason their value cannot be reckoned.
- I would strongly recommend that you consider whether having two incomes is worth it. The bottom line is that, when all the accounting is done, it rarely pays to have two incomes. First, decent daycare is expensive - for anything worth having, at least $700-1000/month/child. Second, there are many hidden expenses of working - how often do you eat out because everyone's too tired to cook? How much do work clothes cost? The net effect is that I'm not sure many families make any more money by both working unless they have very special skills (i.e. doctor,lawyer,etc) or have free childcare.
- The good news: your kids won't be little forever. Hang in there.
- The bad news: your kids won't be little forever. Don't squander the terrible twos sitting in front of the TV or the playstation.
- Get your finances in order. Yes, really. The best thing you can do for your kids is have a good marriage (divorce devastates kids, and anyone who says otherwise is deluded.) And the first best thing you can do for your marriage is to have your finances in order. This doesn't mean making a lot of money, it means not spending money you don't have. If you don't have a budget, make one: http://www.snowmintcs.com/ offers some good software to help.
- As soon as the baby's old enough, arrange a date-night at least once a month. (Typically, "old enough" is about six weeks.) This follows from the previous: the second best thing you can do for your marriage is to spend time together away from the kids. And don't forget to have fun: this shouldn't be a time to bitch about money.
- Following the previous two: if your marriage starts to fall apart, do whatever it takes to stop that. If that means quitting your job and being home, do it -- there's always welfare. Don't wait for the divorce notice to start working on your marriage. (And, oh yes, run like hell from adultery before it happens to you.)
- If someone decides to stay home with the kids, the YMCA is your friend. I'm not sure how common this is, but here the YMCA (1) gives membership to anyone, even if they can't pay and (2) has free childcare while you work out. The time away from the kids is important.
- One thing worth noting: most of the things kids really need cannot be bought, and most of the things that are really good for them are free. A public playground is good for kids on about sixteen million levels - and that $20 toy will be busted within a week.
- This is a team effort: get as much help from the family as you can. But this is your responsility, don't let grandma run your kid's life.
- Discipline early and often, and consistently. How you discipline (i.e. spanking or not) is not nearly as important as being consistent. A book called 1-2-3 Magic offers an excellent start on a good pattern of discipline. Also, if you wait until the kids are three or four to start disciplining, you're doomed. Start when they start crawling and they will grow into it.
- Most importantly: the goal of child-rearing is not always a happy kid. It's a happy, productive adult. Sometimes, the kid needs to cry today to smile tomorrow.
Okay, there's more to say but that's all that comes to mind.And, yes, deception *should* be illegal. In fact, it's always been illegal in many contexts -- they call them "cons". Why shouldn't it be illegal here?