what will set you apart from the thousands of other I.T. folks looking for a job
Heh. everyone is certified in something or other, so the certification itself won't `set you apart'.
A lot of experience, and good networking (as in people networking) skills, is another matter. I find that the best thing to `have' to get a job is a (good) friend on the inside at some huge company.
I would think that a college degree is about the same as certifications
It really depends on an individual, but from my experience (teaching at both a graduate college and one of them certification schools), the average `knowledge/wisdom' of a college graduate is MUCH higher than those of a certification folks.
It takes a lot of commitment to make it though 4 years of school with a well rounded curriculum (ie: history classes, literature classes, science classes, etc., - those may not add any technical skill, but make you overall smarter and more interesting person to work with), and I think (hope?) that employees consider that.
So do I have to cite my source every time I look up a phone # and write it down?!
hmm... as weird as it seems, It might not be so bad... (well, for induhviduals, not companies).
That would mean that you could trace where the telemarketers (or other companies) got their data, and if they can't trace it, then they've stolen it (ie: they shouldn't have it).
Only companies that you provide data yourself (with explicit conditions on use) should have your data.
One of the other major issues of these `public' databases is how to prevent being in one? Maybe there should be a law that takes you out of the database if you don't want to be part of one. (ie: the phone company/telemarketer/spammer would have to obtain a copyright like license from you to use your name:-)
All you have to do is rename the folder to/from:.mozilla to.thunderbird (or vice versa).
Remove everything but the `default' folder from.thunderbird (or.mozilla) directory. Then, in the `default/*' folder, edit `prefs.js' file to right paths (ie: change.mozilla to.thunderbird).
Restart either app, and it will open up the files as if nothing happened.
I was using Mozilla (the whole package) for a while. Then sometime last summer I switched to using Firebird/Thunderbird, and then about a month ago I switched back to plain Mozilla. Here's why:
Most of the time I have a browser and e-mail open anyway, so why have 2 applications open when you can have one? Also, Mozilla, as it is, is far less buggy than Firebird/Thunderbird. I've encountered some really annoying bugs that just annoyed the hell out of me. Also, does anyone really notice the startup speed? (I haven't. I compile Mozilla with all the optimizations, etc., and I really don't see any `speed' difference between this and Firebird).
Now, on my Windows machine, I do use Firebird, but that's simply because I have no need for e-mail there.
(also, the occasional need for ChatZilla makes one more useful than the other).
So as far as I'm concerned, I hope they still keep the intergrated package alive later.
My `agenda' is that I don't want to go through hoops to read the assignments. If they use plain text, I'm perfectly happy. But if they want to use a format, then it better be one I can read right (otherwise what's the point of formatting it in the first place?)
Students are already experts at Microsoft `document processing world', I just give them a good reason to explore alternatives (learn something outside the box for a change). One student experimented with LaTeX, and liked it a lot. You can't say that that's a bad thing.
In the end of the day, they can use whatever they want to use (heck, they can export PDF docs from Word if they want, use pdfwrite, etc.).
...declared a university-wide preference for nonproprietary file standards for school assignments
While teaching any classes (at brooklyn college), for assignments that are electronically submitted, I specifically say that MS Word format is not allowed. (I run Linux - so Word docs would look ugly when viewed in OO.o)
Students have a choice of either: submitting it in plain text (most do, but some can't live without the formatting), or PDF docs. They can either create PDFs via LaTeX (my preferred method) or (now) exporting from OpenOffice:-) (well, they can also use Adobe Acrobat, but most don't seem to have that)
Slowly but surely, every semester, I get a few people to install OpenOffice on their system (and many seem to like it quite a bit).
Another issue is how do you `identify' the person who comes in with a passport where the picture doesn't match, and they claim to have been in an accident? (do you give them a new passport with a new picture?)
unless the military developed something amazing and decided to share it with the company that sold this school their system.. methinks that's balderdash
Yeah, but look at it this way: everyone involved is going to be better off with the system than without (even if it doesn't work).
ie: developers/company who sells the system (which as you pointed out, has about 0 chance of actually working) make the money (which is what this whole thing is about).
The school who buy the system get to be the most sci-fi school in town, with lots of publicity (who cares if it works - as long as it's `there' - and sex offenders are afraid of it enough not to show up in the first place).
Also, the tax payer gets to flip the bill for everything! (free money!)
It's a win-win situation for everyone involved (except the tax payer of course).
The point is that these systems have about as many successful implementations as... amm... well, they don't have any! Nowhere have I seen/heard (now, or at any point in the past) that cameras and even the best `state of the art' facial recognition worked at all.
(and by `at all', it can generally only pick out a few faces out of a hundred. Nop, not *thousands*, a few hundred. The images also have to be up-close and personal, with just the right lighting conditions, right shadows, etc., Until someone figures out the basic fundamental issues involved with image recognition, these systems will only be hot air, and major money wasting effort on behalf of ignorant governments/corporations).
How about a challenge - can anyone make a robot that produces, without hardcoded input, a +5 comment?
For that, all you'd need is a beowolf cluster of robots located in soviet russia, all Windows hating, Linux loving, making you produce the +5 comments.
Amm... and occationally add in a Simpsons reference, and you're set:-)
Nowhere in that equation is there EVER risk of a glitch in the computing system factored in.
And how would that be different from say... investing in Microsoft, and having their stock do a nose dive because of some internet worm?
(or worse, investing in something like toilet paper and having the company go belly up (or loose lots of profits) because their computer system screwed something up?)
What if after an investigation they determine that the glitch was caused by lightning hitting something just in the right place in the right time, and flipped a few bits in just the right way. Who do you blame then?
Besides, people who lost money on this are not value investors - day traders are gamblers - a value investor wouldn't invest in something that `just came up'.
You think that's bad... I live in NYC/Queens (all around apartment buildings; tons of potential customers), and I can't get DSL! (not for the lack of trying - had people from two different companies come in and try - and all concluded the wires leading to the building suck, and nobody is gonna pay to upgrade'em).
Thankfully, cable came to the area a year ago (when it seemed like everyone else had it for ages).
How about video conferencing? You can't do any decent quality with 40k up (what I'm getting as up stream on timewarner cable).
Also, the very fact that you're getting less upstream than downstream is degrading. Big companies are labeling you the consumer of information, and not the producer of information.
Maybe I want to publish my own music, or my own videos (hey, with a digital camera, its easy to create a home movie, that you might want to distribute online).
The traffic subdivision is unfair (at least to me) since high upstream costs a LOT more money; I'm quite happy with the 400k or so downstream I'm getting.
Slashdot Mirror
And if you think you're an expert in a field while taking less than a year to learn the stuff, you're also in a wrong industry.
what will set you apart from the thousands of other I.T. folks looking for a job
Heh. everyone is certified in something or other, so the certification itself won't `set you apart'.
A lot of experience, and good networking (as in people networking) skills, is another matter. I find that the best thing to `have' to get a job is a (good) friend on the inside at some huge company.
I would think that a college degree is about the same as certifications
It really depends on an individual, but from my experience (teaching at both a graduate college and one of them certification schools), the average `knowledge/wisdom' of a college graduate is MUCH higher than those of a certification folks.
It takes a lot of commitment to make it though 4 years of school with a well rounded curriculum (ie: history classes, literature classes, science classes, etc., - those may not add any technical skill, but make you overall smarter and more interesting person to work with), and I think (hope?) that employees consider that.
I'd be pissed at the situation, but this is something that'd save my life.
Hmm... I can see it now...
"Viagra!!! It could save your LIFE!!!"
So do I have to cite my source every time I look up a phone # and write it down?!
:-)
hmm... as weird as it seems, It might not be so bad... (well, for induhviduals, not companies).
That would mean that you could trace where the telemarketers (or other companies) got their data, and if they can't trace it, then they've stolen it (ie: they shouldn't have it).
Only companies that you provide data yourself (with explicit conditions on use) should have your data.
One of the other major issues of these `public' databases is how to prevent being in one? Maybe there should be a law that takes you out of the database if you don't want to be part of one. (ie: the phone company/telemarketer/spammer would have to obtain a copyright like license from you to use your name
Hmm....
Glowing people won't be a good idea...
:-)
But then you could easily spot those who are `bright' individuals
I've moved e-mail back and forth between the two:
.mozilla to .thunderbird (or vice versa).
.thunderbird (or .mozilla) directory. Then, in the `default/*' folder, edit `prefs.js' file to right paths (ie: change .mozilla to .thunderbird).
All you have to do is rename the folder to/from:
Remove everything but the `default' folder from
Restart either app, and it will open up the files as if nothing happened.
A bit tidious, but it can be done.
I was using Mozilla (the whole package) for a while. Then sometime last summer I switched to using Firebird/Thunderbird, and then about a month ago I switched back to plain Mozilla. Here's why:
Most of the time I have a browser and e-mail open anyway, so why have 2 applications open when you can have one? Also, Mozilla, as it is, is far less buggy than Firebird/Thunderbird. I've encountered some really annoying bugs that just annoyed the hell out of me. Also, does anyone really notice the startup speed? (I haven't. I compile Mozilla with all the optimizations, etc., and I really don't see any `speed' difference between this and Firebird).
Now, on my Windows machine, I do use Firebird, but that's simply because I have no need for e-mail there.
(also, the occasional need for ChatZilla makes one more useful than the other).
So as far as I'm concerned, I hope they still keep the intergrated package alive later.
citing an employee table as an example
:-)
At which point you'll find out that that has also been patented
The $ dependency reaches from the US Government into the taxpayer wallet.
Government spending tax money? Heh. And all this time I thought it was imaginary monopoly money, that everyone else thinks is real.
And which company is?
When it comes down to making money, any company can be `evil'.
Wow. Million lines of *Perl* code???
what's your agenda in forbidding Word formats
My `agenda' is that I don't want to go through hoops to read the assignments. If they use plain text, I'm perfectly happy. But if they want to use a format, then it better be one I can read right (otherwise what's the point of formatting it in the first place?)
Students are already experts at Microsoft `document processing world', I just give them a good reason to explore alternatives (learn something outside the box for a change). One student experimented with LaTeX, and liked it a lot. You can't say that that's a bad thing.
In the end of the day, they can use whatever they want to use (heck, they can export PDF docs from Word if they want, use pdfwrite, etc.).
...declared a university-wide preference for nonproprietary file standards for school assignments
:-) (well, they can also use Adobe Acrobat, but most don't seem to have that)
While teaching any classes (at brooklyn college), for assignments that are electronically submitted, I specifically say that MS Word format is not allowed. (I run Linux - so Word docs would look ugly when viewed in OO.o)
Students have a choice of either: submitting it in plain text (most do, but some can't live without the formatting), or PDF docs. They can either create PDFs via LaTeX (my preferred method) or (now) exporting from OpenOffice
Slowly but surely, every semester, I get a few people to install OpenOffice on their system (and many seem to like it quite a bit).
Does anyone know of any organizations that actually use SCO Unix?
:-)
According to SCO, everyone. You can't have Linux without that special SCO code
Heh. Quake (1 & 2) even run on a PocketPC!
Heh, I never realized my iPAQ was faster than P4 1.7Ghz,... heh. No wonder I still use a P1, these things just keep getting slower and slower...
Another issue is how do you `identify' the person who comes in with a passport where the picture doesn't match, and they claim to have been in an accident? (do you give them a new passport with a new picture?)
unless the military developed something amazing and decided to share it with the company that sold this school their system.. methinks that's balderdash
Yeah, but look at it this way: everyone involved is going to be better off with the system than without (even if it doesn't work).
ie: developers/company who sells the system (which as you pointed out, has about 0 chance of actually working) make the money (which is what this whole thing is about).
The school who buy the system get to be the most sci-fi school in town, with lots of publicity (who cares if it works - as long as it's `there' - and sex offenders are afraid of it enough not to show up in the first place).
Also, the tax payer gets to flip the bill for everything! (free money!)
It's a win-win situation for everyone involved (except the tax payer of course).
amm... don't shave for a few weeks?
... amm... well, they don't have any! Nowhere have I seen/heard (now, or at any point in the past) that cameras and even the best `state of the art' facial recognition worked at all.
The point is that these systems have about as many successful implementations as
(and by `at all', it can generally only pick out a few faces out of a hundred. Nop, not *thousands*, a few hundred. The images also have to be up-close and personal, with just the right lighting conditions, right shadows, etc., Until someone figures out the basic fundamental issues involved with image recognition, these systems will only be hot air, and major money wasting effort on behalf of ignorant governments/corporations).
Well, if `the good die young' works in reverse, then Darl is immortal.
I wonder, specifically, what instruments this thing'll have that will require their own little nuke plant as opposed to batteries.
To power HAL of course.
With 2011, they're 10 years late, but better late than never...
How about a challenge - can anyone make a robot that produces, without hardcoded input, a +5 comment?
:-)
For that, all you'd need is a beowolf cluster of robots located in soviet russia, all Windows hating, Linux loving, making you produce the +5 comments.
Amm... and occationally add in a Simpsons reference, and you're set
Nowhere in that equation is there EVER risk of a glitch in the computing system factored in.
And how would that be different from say... investing in Microsoft, and having their stock do a nose dive because of some internet worm?
(or worse, investing in something like toilet paper and having the company go belly up (or loose lots of profits) because their computer system screwed something up?)
What if after an investigation they determine that the glitch was caused by lightning hitting something just in the right place in the right time, and flipped a few bits in just the right way. Who do you blame then?
Besides, people who lost money on this are not value investors - day traders are gamblers - a value investor wouldn't invest in something that `just came up'.
You think that's bad... I live in NYC/Queens (all around apartment buildings; tons of potential customers), and I can't get DSL! (not for the lack of trying - had people from two different companies come in and try - and all concluded the wires leading to the building suck, and nobody is gonna pay to upgrade'em).
Thankfully, cable came to the area a year ago (when it seemed like everyone else had it for ages).
most people do not need upload speed.
How about video conferencing? You can't do any decent quality with 40k up (what I'm getting as up stream on timewarner cable).
Also, the very fact that you're getting less upstream than downstream is degrading. Big companies are labeling you the consumer of information, and not the producer of information.
Maybe I want to publish my own music, or my own videos (hey, with a digital camera, its easy to create a home movie, that you might want to distribute online).
The traffic subdivision is unfair (at least to me) since high upstream costs a LOT more money; I'm quite happy with the 400k or so downstream I'm getting.