Well said. I tend to think that anything that can create a lot of wealth (without money) would also cause a -huge- explosion in population growth, and nullify any benefits.
B: Doesn't matter... your office, Bill's office, Larry's office, Susan's office, they're all *MY* fuckin' offices, as a matter of fact, the whole fucking building is MINE!!! And your office is about to become inside the damn janitor's closet. Capiche you little punk?
Heh. I generally take a different approach. I figure if they wanna cheat, fine. It's their business. I don't make it my priority to seek out the cheaters. Unless they're too obvious about it (ie: beyond a reasonable doubt). I make it known that if I discover copied stuff, I split the grade among the contributors. (I once split the grade 9 ways).
Overall, why should professors care? I'm serious. If the students -want- to pay money to have someone else do the work, who are we to say they can't? I've noticed that most cheaters never graduate... and if they ever do, most don't work in the field... they don't have the right personality to get through something. So their degree is virtually useless---which is primarily their fault.
In the long road of life, cheating will catch up to them one day...
Now, the fact that it `devalues' the degree itself is another question. I'm of the opinion that idiots can and will graduate from every possible school---so placing artificial preconcieved value on the degree itself is a rather bad judgement call.
I think students (and schools, and society, etc.) forget that it's not about the grades... or the degree... it's about the EDUCATION.
Isn't that the lesson that business school is supposed to teach?
`cheating' in business is self-defeating. ie: consider cheating in school: you're paying money for a degree, yet you're not getting all you can get out of the school (namely, the knowledge you've paid for). What's the point of cheating?
In business, I'd consider `cheating' to be: `being creative with the financial report', and generally pumping the price of the stock... and cashing out. When business folks cheat, it's usually the shareholders who end up being screwed.
When business folk -improve- their company value (stock price isn't `value'), that's not cheating (that's just business are usual). So no, cheating isn't how one runs great businesses... it's how one ruins them (and makes a few millionares in the process---which isn't a thing business schools should teach).
The forecast for UK is 9C lower average temperature and 15C lower minimum temperature during the winter.
Wouldn't that amm... freeze things and... amm... reform the ice cap? (or maybe those things are sorta balancing things out...) Get too little ice, guft stream shuts down, makes more ice... repeat.
Just a thought.
Re:Business is good - just get healthcare clients
on
The Engine of US Jobs
·
· Score: 1
What they produce is a healthy population.
I've yet to see a medical establishment make anyone `healthy'. The prevailing strategy seems to get you into a monthly loop of treatment---with medicine based on steroids to `make you better' (while in reality causing you more harm---thus, ensuring a longer term patient).
There's no business value in curing folks (nor is there business value in a healthy population). If someone came up with a "cure-all" magic pill... the doctors and hospitals would be the first to protest (followed closely by drug companies)!
And exactly how are you goint to determine that? And exactly how are you going to make that happen without the opposition party making sure it doesn't happen?
Make it a crime to oppose you (buying out enough folks in congress will get -anything- passed; even rival congressmen like money!). Then by definition, everyone who opposes you is a criminal, and cannot vote (and similarly lose all their other rights due to lack of representation). Problem solved. How do you think totalitarian states work?
Ie: While `opposing' the president didn't become `criminal' in recent years, it was frowned upon quite severely in the months following 9/11/2001. Push that a bit over the border, and it wouldn't have taken long for congress to liken criticism of administration to `treason' (or something else; possibly enough to deport folks, as has happened in the 1950s).
Not only that, but folks tend to miss that it's not prof's ``job'' to make these things available online---profs don't get -paid- to do that. It's also not something he creates during class time (I can't imagine him creating digital class notes -during- the class).
Charging for such things doens't sound right though... I wouldn't do it.
Heh. That brings up a good point... folks can't even protest these, 'cause if they do, that would just be another opportunity/reason for them to try out these things (well, unless you protest them by sitting by your computer being shocked).
If they are going to expect an interview candidate to write a web server in a few hours, then what will they want when you work there?
I'd imagine it wasn't an apache clone they were asking, but something similar to the sample mini-web server found on CPAN, or Networking chapter in all Java books (the basic request/response loop). That's a page of code, at best (in Perl, Java, etc.---it's a bit more involved in C++, but not -that- hard). It's a sort of thing any developer should be able to do (if they've ever coded networking stuff).
I seriously doubt they were expecting much from a few hours of coding.
Also, coding questions are -very- different from puzzle questions. Most puzzles have that `obviousness' about them, that if you don't see it right away, you won't see it until -much- later. Coding on the other hand lets you do what you're there to do...
None. Not only that, but if these patends ever end up in non-Microsoft's hands (it -could- happen; say in 10 years), then that party won't even care that Microsoft has promised not to fight.
Slashdot Mirror
Well said. I tend to think that anything that can create a lot of wealth (without money) would also cause a -huge- explosion in population growth, and nullify any benefits.
Updates complete. Restart now?
:-)
Oh, and just like WinZip shareware, switch the location of buttons... so users click on the wrong thing more often
U: (dejected) sir, we're not in your office.
B: Doesn't matter... your office, Bill's office, Larry's office, Susan's office, they're all *MY* fuckin' offices, as a matter of fact, the whole fucking building is MINE!!! And your office is about to become inside the damn janitor's closet. Capiche you little punk?
U: (dejected) sir, we're talking on the phone.
B: Hey kid, this is AOL, you think we got this far by being idiots? Now get out of my office.
U: (dejected) sir, we're not in your office.
Heh. I generally take a different approach. I figure if they wanna cheat, fine. It's their business. I don't make it my priority to seek out the cheaters. Unless they're too obvious about it (ie: beyond a reasonable doubt). I make it known that if I discover copied stuff, I split the grade among the contributors. (I once split the grade 9 ways).
Overall, why should professors care? I'm serious. If the students -want- to pay money to have someone else do the work, who are we to say they can't? I've noticed that most cheaters never graduate... and if they ever do, most don't work in the field... they don't have the right personality to get through something. So their degree is virtually useless---which is primarily their fault.
In the long road of life, cheating will catch up to them one day...
Now, the fact that it `devalues' the degree itself is another question. I'm of the opinion that idiots can and will graduate from every possible school---so placing artificial preconcieved value on the degree itself is a rather bad judgement call.
I think students (and schools, and society, etc.) forget that it's not about the grades... or the degree... it's about the EDUCATION.
Isn't that the lesson that business school is supposed to teach?
`cheating' in business is self-defeating. ie: consider cheating in school: you're paying money for a degree, yet you're not getting all you can get out of the school (namely, the knowledge you've paid for). What's the point of cheating?
In business, I'd consider `cheating' to be: `being creative with the financial report', and generally pumping the price of the stock... and cashing out. When business folks cheat, it's usually the shareholders who end up being screwed.
When business folk -improve- their company value (stock price isn't `value'), that's not cheating (that's just business are usual). So no, cheating isn't how one runs great businesses... it's how one ruins them (and makes a few millionares in the process---which isn't a thing business schools should teach).
The forecast for UK is 9C lower average temperature and 15C lower minimum temperature during the winter.
Wouldn't that amm... freeze things and... amm... reform the ice cap? (or maybe those things are sorta balancing things out...) Get too little ice, guft stream shuts down, makes more ice... repeat.
Just a thought.
What they produce is a healthy population.
I've yet to see a medical establishment make anyone `healthy'. The prevailing strategy seems to get you into a monthly loop of treatment---with medicine based on steroids to `make you better' (while in reality causing you more harm---thus, ensuring a longer term patient).
There's no business value in curing folks (nor is there business value in a healthy population). If someone came up with a "cure-all" magic pill... the doctors and hospitals would be the first to protest (followed closely by drug companies)!
It is well known that one reason people grow facial hair is to build a personal "wall" between themselves and the world.
:-)
Or just lazy when it comes to shaving
And exactly how are you goint to determine that? And exactly how are you going to make that happen without the opposition party making sure it doesn't happen?
Make it a crime to oppose you (buying out enough folks in congress will get -anything- passed; even rival congressmen like money!). Then by definition, everyone who opposes you is a criminal, and cannot vote (and similarly lose all their other rights due to lack of representation). Problem solved. How do you think totalitarian states work?
Ie: While `opposing' the president didn't become `criminal' in recent years, it was frowned upon quite severely in the months following 9/11/2001. Push that a bit over the border, and it wouldn't have taken long for congress to liken criticism of administration to `treason' (or something else; possibly enough to deport folks, as has happened in the 1950s).
Hmm... but doesn't the sig capture the spirit of Murphy? (or maybe it's not even -that- Murphy :-)
NO SERVICE for NOTHING
Not only that, but folks tend to miss that it's not prof's ``job'' to make these things available online---profs don't get -paid- to do that. It's also not something he creates during class time (I can't imagine him creating digital class notes -during- the class).
Charging for such things doens't sound right though... I wouldn't do it.
Heh. That brings up a good point... folks can't even protest these, 'cause if they do, that would just be another opportunity/reason for them to try out these things (well, unless you protest them by sitting by your computer being shocked).
If they are going to expect an interview candidate to write a web server in a few hours, then what will they want when you work there?
I'd imagine it wasn't an apache clone they were asking, but something similar to the sample mini-web server found on CPAN, or Networking chapter in all Java books (the basic request/response loop). That's a page of code, at best (in Perl, Java, etc.---it's a bit more involved in C++, but not -that- hard). It's a sort of thing any developer should be able to do (if they've ever coded networking stuff).
I seriously doubt they were expecting much from a few hours of coding.
Also, coding questions are -very- different from puzzle questions. Most puzzles have that `obviousness' about them, that if you don't see it right away, you won't see it until -much- later. Coding on the other hand lets you do what you're there to do...
No responsible studio or FX house would EVER destroy the material they began with.
You're making an assumption about someone else's competence. A dangerous thing to do.
What legal binding do these "pledges" have?
None. Not only that, but if these patends ever end up in non-Microsoft's hands (it -could- happen; say in 10 years), then that party won't even care that Microsoft has promised not to fight.
Alternative? If the site's made well using web standards, all the browser needs to do is ignore the stylesheet...
I meant when folks use images without an "alt" attribute, or flash without a text alrenative.
Haha.
...hardened sludge will be produced each day and will be sold for road construction.
I also like this one:
Better than the current use of sludge.. as fertilizer! (and no, I'm not kidding).
I can only see this as ending poorly for site developers.
You mean they'll have to provide a simple text only alternative to the site? Uh, oh, that's like -so- bad for everyone involved.
Nothing like enforcing your monopoly like buying out the schools...
:-)
Exactly. This borg maturation chaimber...errr...school will breed yet another generation of mindless drones.
Wait till they start buying out jails
Anti-ageing research is selfish
Nobody will take you seriuosly unless you live by example. Will you willingly die before you hit `old age' and become a `burden on society'?
The trick might be to turn off the expression of the gene temporarily to rejuvenate aging organs, then switch it back in again to suppress cancer.
Only to be killed at a zebra crossing right after the procedure.
They shouldn't leave. They're the board. The CEO has to answer to -them-. The way things are going, the CEO will be out of a job soon.
Short sell! Short sell!!! ...if only you packaged it up in an animated gif, and flashed it every 17 seconds...
Some loony CEO at HP spies on her employees...
Doesn't the board pick the CEO? If they're not happy, just kick'em out!