As a high school math tutor for one of the large national test prep companies, I can say with complete certainty that even when the "box" is replaced with a variable name, students still do this. I find that it's not so much that they don't grasp that the = symbol means equality as much as that they don't realize what equality means.
If I give a problem like:
f(x) = 2x + 7
g(x) = sqrt( f(x) )*5
Many students can solve this problem; a good portion of them just understand "oh, I do a substitution" - they don't understand fully that the equality of a variable with some expression is WHY their answer is correct.
Similarly, something like:
3/15 = x/225
Most students get thsi right; "oh, I just cross-multiply" - but they don't understand WHY cross-multiplication is the correct thing to do.
Teachers need to start teaching real math in addition to problem solving methods and heuristics.
Re:Was Not Impressed at All
on
Lost Ends
·
· Score: 1
They explain that Faraday had a severe memory problem (probably due to stuffing all that science in his skull) - hence the excessive notebook use.
I, for one, welcome our new corporate overlords...
In soviet Russia, Pirate Bay buys you!...
I pay for my music, games and video, you insensitive CLOD!...
All your Bay are belong to us...
And on a separate note, the "Cowboy Neal" option is missing! Come on guys, you're dropping the ball!
I would say "I guess I had it coming" if I chose my zip code as my password or made all of my "security questions" have answers that people could glean from a phonebook (or my facebook page).
I'm not trying to say that what he did was right. It was highly amusing, but terribly wrong, unethical and illegal. However, I think there should be a legal distinction between the willful hacking of computer systems (via intentional backdoors, security holes, malware, viruses/worms or password dictionary attacks) and guessing someone's password correctly, as there is a potential for huge differences in intent (which is relevant to most crimes in our legal system).
Even with murder, if you plan your crime in advance and take steps to put your plan into action, the crime is considered more severe than if you were to suddenly decide to kill someone as a "crime of passion." I'd argue that a similar distinction can be made between intentional electronic vandalism/espionage and casual password-guessing.
Never expect credit for good work unless you "own" the work.
If you "own" the work, then you should get credit.
What's to "own"? Easy. Ask these questions.
Did you come up with the idea?
Did you architect or play a large role in architecting the solution from top to bottom?
Were you the primary technical contact for the project which the business people (read: end users) could reach out to to make sure requirements were met?
Did the work add real value to the company? (read: dollars and cents)
Was there a real functional improvement in the way things are done due to the work?
Think of it as a quiz - add 1 point to your score for each "YES"
Depending on your environment I'd say at a minimum 3-4 points before you can claim credit at a higher level. 4-5 in some environments.
So I'll take a crack at answering based on the original post:
No, my boss did
No, I just added some functionality that was asked for by my boss
No, my boss communicated with the end users to gather requirements
No, this was mainly an aesthetic change - maybe it improves customer satisfaction, but not significantly enough to impact the bottom line
I can't answer this one for you.
Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt on 4 and 5, I'd say your maximum score here is a 2. What does this mean? This means you should basically think of yourself as a compiler that accepts as its input the language of your manager and produces workable code / markup. You didn't add value to the process, you merely did the grunt work (which is valuable, but can be done by anyone).
Now, I've had situations where I've had a 4 or 5 and still didn't get credit... times like those are when I start considering whether I'd be happier in a Buddhist monastery somewhere, raking sand all day. For the record, I still haven't decided.
"Google's filing has no legal standing."
Whew, good thing the FCC is not a judicial body, but rather a legislature-appointed commission with loosely-defined and self-expanded powers of regulation over said wavelengths. If Google had filed in a court, I'd say there was no legal standing, since Google did not incur any damages and only a party who has been damaged can seek recourse in a court of equity. However, since the FCC is a regulatory agency, I'm pretty sure any citizen (or corporation) can lodge a complaint. Case in point, no one had to deal with anything "legal" related when George Carlin's "words you can't say on radio" was adopted as the official list of words you're not allowed to say after normal, average citizens complained to the FCC about hearing a rebroadcast of the routine on the radio. No one had "legal standing" after the famous Superbowl "wardrobe malfunction", but the FCC still acted on the complaints it received and levied some of the largest fines in broadcasting history.
Verizon is not going to be able to run counter to the FCC's will without a protracted legal battle which would need to, at its heart, question the boundaries of the FCC's regulatory power.... Actually, that may not be such a bad thing.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the popular (albeit contrived) marketing of Blu-Ray as "BD-ROM" media, which sounds an awful lot like "CD-ROM."
Just saying it gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling inside, like getting reacquainted with a familiar friend.
I don't think name will play into it too much, to be honest, nor do I honestly think that the 3-month HD-DVD headstart will help too much either. I'd wager decent odds that in the end, it will be up to Middle America to decide, since (I'm pretty sure) they are statistically the slowest adopters.
Any statisticians/marketing gurus care to chime in and correct me/confirm?
I was always under the impression that simple cases of copyright infringement are generally considered an issue for the courts of equity (ie. a civil issue). As far as I understand, and again I could be completely incorrectly, those FBI warnings at the beginning of all our media generally refer to the mass-production/organized crime aspects of committing this tort, not to any single commission or commissions of the act. Therefore, I would figure the criminal harm of trespass would supercede any civil claim Sony had.
They did something similar once on an episode of Mythbusters. I believe it was an attempt to disprove the notion that 'there is a car so stinky it can't be cleaned and sold.' They left some dead livestock in the sealed car for some period of time and then attempted to clean it out using various cleaning methods.
In deference to the advertisers for the show, I won't reveal how it ended, but probably a good watch for someone facing a similar problem.
According to the Discovery Channel website, this episode is going to air again soon:
I think anyone who has spent a reasonable amount of time looking through the Harry Potter fanfic community would realize that this is not a place you want your children freely roaming about or practicing their writing skills. That is not to say that there aren't plenty of wonderful writers out there who write really amazing stories. Some of these stories are full of real emotion and demonstrate the skill of a number of talented, undiscovered writers. Rather, I'm simply saying that an unsupervised child in the world of Harry Potter fanfiction might wonder how exactly Severus Snape managed to get pregnant with Draco Malfoy's baby, and why exactly Ginny Weasley became so much of a harlet.
Having been exposed to both sides of the HP fanfiction, and having rejected both of them for my own reasons, I would have to say any parent that would encourage their child to join in this type of community has certainly not been exposed to it in its entirety and would be sorely mistaken to assume it is a safe place for children to roam.
Slashdot Mirror
As a high school math tutor for one of the large national test prep companies, I can say with complete certainty that even when the "box" is replaced with a variable name, students still do this. I find that it's not so much that they don't grasp that the = symbol means equality as much as that they don't realize what equality means.
If I give a problem like:
f(x) = 2x + 7
g(x) = sqrt( f(x) )*5
Many students can solve this problem; a good portion of them just understand "oh, I do a substitution" - they don't understand fully that the equality of a variable with some expression is WHY their answer is correct. Similarly, something like: 3/15 = x/225 Most students get thsi right; "oh, I just cross-multiply" - but they don't understand WHY cross-multiplication is the correct thing to do. Teachers need to start teaching real math in addition to problem solving methods and heuristics.
They explain that Faraday had a severe memory problem (probably due to stuffing all that science in his skull) - hence the excessive notebook use.
But when will they finally add Saibot?
I, for one, welcome our new corporate overlords... In soviet Russia, Pirate Bay buys you!... I pay for my music, games and video, you insensitive CLOD!... All your Bay are belong to us... And on a separate note, the "Cowboy Neal" option is missing! Come on guys, you're dropping the ball!
... welcome our new corporate overlords
I hope you're ready to open a Slashdot rehabilitation clinic in Korea...
I would say "I guess I had it coming" if I chose my zip code as my password or made all of my "security questions" have answers that people could glean from a phonebook (or my facebook page).
I'm not trying to say that what he did was right. It was highly amusing, but terribly wrong, unethical and illegal. However, I think there should be a legal distinction between the willful hacking of computer systems (via intentional backdoors, security holes, malware, viruses/worms or password dictionary attacks) and guessing someone's password correctly, as there is a potential for huge differences in intent (which is relevant to most crimes in our legal system).
Even with murder, if you plan your crime in advance and take steps to put your plan into action, the crime is considered more severe than if you were to suddenly decide to kill someone as a "crime of passion." I'd argue that a similar distinction can be made between intentional electronic vandalism/espionage and casual password-guessing.
A cursory glance at a semi-reliable source of information hints at which company ABC just might be (also apparently on the same slashdotted server as brucefwebster.com -- confirmed via DNS).
Now who would like to identify BigFirm?
... but I have yet to see any compelling evidence.
Don't you mean Pat Buchanan? Oh, wait...
Maybe I read this wrong, but isn't the field limited to SourceForge projects? Summary should be updated to make this clearer kplzthxbye
Never expect credit for good work unless you "own" the work. If you "own" the work, then you should get credit.
What's to "own"? Easy. Ask these questions.
Think of it as a quiz - add 1 point to your score for each "YES"
Depending on your environment I'd say at a minimum 3-4 points before you can claim credit at a higher level. 4-5 in some environments.
So I'll take a crack at answering based on the original post:
Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt on 4 and 5, I'd say your maximum score here is a 2. What does this mean? This means you should basically think of yourself as a compiler that accepts as its input the language of your manager and produces workable code / markup. You didn't add value to the process, you merely did the grunt work (which is valuable, but can be done by anyone).
Now, I've had situations where I've had a 4 or 5 and still didn't get credit... times like those are when I start considering whether I'd be happier in a Buddhist monastery somewhere, raking sand all day. For the record, I still haven't decided.
"Google's filing has no legal standing." Whew, good thing the FCC is not a judicial body, but rather a legislature-appointed commission with loosely-defined and self-expanded powers of regulation over said wavelengths. If Google had filed in a court, I'd say there was no legal standing, since Google did not incur any damages and only a party who has been damaged can seek recourse in a court of equity. However, since the FCC is a regulatory agency, I'm pretty sure any citizen (or corporation) can lodge a complaint. Case in point, no one had to deal with anything "legal" related when George Carlin's "words you can't say on radio" was adopted as the official list of words you're not allowed to say after normal, average citizens complained to the FCC about hearing a rebroadcast of the routine on the radio. No one had "legal standing" after the famous Superbowl "wardrobe malfunction", but the FCC still acted on the complaints it received and levied some of the largest fines in broadcasting history. Verizon is not going to be able to run counter to the FCC's will without a protracted legal battle which would need to, at its heart, question the boundaries of the FCC's regulatory power.... Actually, that may not be such a bad thing.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the popular (albeit contrived) marketing of Blu-Ray as "BD-ROM" media, which sounds an awful lot like "CD-ROM."
Just saying it gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling inside, like getting reacquainted with a familiar friend.
I don't think name will play into it too much, to be honest, nor do I honestly think that the 3-month HD-DVD headstart will help too much either. I'd wager decent odds that in the end, it will be up to Middle America to decide, since (I'm pretty sure) they are statistically the slowest adopters.
Any statisticians/marketing gurus care to chime in and correct me/confirm?
I was always under the impression that simple cases of copyright infringement are generally considered an issue for the courts of equity (ie. a civil issue). As far as I understand, and again I could be completely incorrectly, those FBI warnings at the beginning of all our media generally refer to the mass-production/organized crime aspects of committing this tort, not to any single commission or commissions of the act. Therefore, I would figure the criminal harm of trespass would supercede any civil claim Sony had.
The above link appears to be broken (an sql error relating to not being able to find a user id in the database).
Copy the URL and add the following to the query string:
&user=1
The site will then load without problem.
In deference to the advertisers for the show, I won't reveal how it ended, but probably a good watch for someone facing a similar problem.
According to the Discovery Channel website, this episode is going to air again soon:
- Sep 14 2004 @ 10:00 PM
- Sep 15 2004 @ 01:00 AM
- Sep 19 2004 @ 12:00 PM
Good luck.I think anyone who has spent a reasonable amount of time looking through the Harry Potter fanfic community would realize that this is not a place you want your children freely roaming about or practicing their writing skills. That is not to say that there aren't plenty of wonderful writers out there who write really amazing stories. Some of these stories are full of real emotion and demonstrate the skill of a number of talented, undiscovered writers. Rather, I'm simply saying that an unsupervised child in the world of Harry Potter fanfiction might wonder how exactly Severus Snape managed to get pregnant with Draco Malfoy's baby, and why exactly Ginny Weasley became so much of a harlet.
Having been exposed to both sides of the HP fanfiction, and having rejected both of them for my own reasons, I would have to say any parent that would encourage their child to join in this type of community has certainly not been exposed to it in its entirety and would be sorely mistaken to assume it is a safe place for children to roam.