I used to write software for military aircraft. I wouldn't want an easter egg in there, either.
On the other hand, there's nothing wrong if you need any valid latitude and longitude for a target in an automated simulation test script, and just happen to choose your mother-in-law's house:-) You can leave your mark without being unprofessional or reckless about it.
This is what competition is for. I learned very early in my career that companies with labor forces represented by unions are usually the worst ones to work for. Think airlines, auto workers, call centers, and schools. It's impossible to tell where the cycle started, but draconian measures by management compel workers to strengthen their union and make more demands, which compels management to impose more draconian measures over the things they can control in order to keep their bottom line.
When it is more difficult to fire someone, they are always on the lookout for the tiniest fireable offense, and always on the lookout for new ways to cut costs and increase productivity within the bounds of their contract.
Basically, unions work very hard to help workers keep their crappy jobs at crappy companies. They also try to bargain for minimum productivity requirements so ridiculously low that the company has tremendous pressure to keep wages commensurately low. By doing both those things, unions are ultimately working against the best interests of those they represent.
Do yourself and your fellow workers a favor. Quit and go to work for a company that doesn't need a union to retain workers. There are plenty out there.
News flash: hardly anyone cares about the lack of women in computer science, either. If a bunch of women actually wanted to go into computer science and were refused, that would be a newsworthy story.
Wouldn't it be nice to be able to vote for different presidents for different issues? This year, it would probably work out to one "President of National Security" and one "President of Everything Else."
I couldn't agree more. My wife tried to take a programming intro course and gave up because they asked her to make relatively complex algorithms to demonstrate mastery of simple syntax. She understood the coding just fine, but the teacher just assumed everyone understood algorithms. My wife also got hung up on minutia like "public static void main."
If I were to teach programming to someone like my wife, I would start out with something really simple like LOGO. Easy syntax and instant results. I would start out with simple sequencing. "What sequences of commands are necessary to draw a square, star, etc." Once they got that down, I'd move to iteration. "Did you notice you're repeating the same commands over and over? This is how you get the computer to do that for you." Then procedures and selection. "Write a procedure that asks what shape to draw and how big." Only after they got those basics down would I move to topics like compilers and data types.
Let's see...my undergrad alma mater consistently ranks in the top ten party schools. My graduate alma mater consistently ranks among the top ten football teams, and oh yeah, engineering programs. What was my most important factor in selecting them? Convenience to where I lived and worked at the time. Try to put that into an online service.
I was driving on the US Interstate, going about 80 mph... I can either stay behind him and risk being caught in a pileup when he wrecks (not good); slow down to 55mph...
You have one of those cars that doesn't have any speeds between 55 and 80 too? I hate those new quantum engines.
The most dangerous drivers on the road are those who think they are routinely forced into dangerous acts by other drivers.
Until you've seen in real life a compiler error telling you that you accidentally tried to add a variable holding a distance in meters to one with a distance in feet, you don't know what you're talking about. Although people can find a way to break any language, some programming languages indeed are much more resistant to bugs than others.
Obviously, no such outrage exists. There isn't at least one complaint about the cost of the war on every remotely political discussion anywhere on the internet, even if Congress isn't currently debating the subject. Why am I even answering a nonexistent post?
Seriously, even if they disagree with a given war, nearly everyone recognizes defense spending in general as a legitimate, even fundamental function of government. Not so with buying illiquid assets.
Working tech support = good thing. Not having the sense to quit earlier = sign of incompetence:-)
Seriously, you're competing against recent graduates who have had contract work or internships with actual programming experience. I would suggest taking one of those, so an employer doesn't have to take as high a financial risk in hiring you. Bid low enough and eventually someone will bite.
Also, no offense because I've never met you, but be aware that companies will often reject someone for a different reason than the one they give, in order to keep from hurting your feelings or keep from getting themselves into legal trouble. A person who would reject you for a thin resume is going to reject you after reading your resume, and not waste time calling you in for an interview. You might want to get some professional help from a recruiter on your interview skills.
Re:Is it ok to keep kids off the internet these da
on
Good Email For Kids?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Parenting is something you learn by doing and learn by consulting people who have done. No offense, but most parents discount the advice of the childless because 1) we used to be one and remember how clueless we were, and 2) they come up to us all the time and tell us their clueless ideas. I won't say it's impossible for people without children to give meaningful parenting advice, just unlikely.
For example, the advice about setting a minimum age for using the internet is completely useless. First of all, what age do you set? When they start asking for their own email account makes a lot more sense than an arbitrary age set before you even know if they'll be interested or capable at that age. Second, you don't generally dump kids from 100% oversight to 100% independence when a certain birthday hits.
The OP has made the judgment that his kids are ready for an incremental amount of independence provided that they won't accidentally be exposed to inappropriate spam. He knows his kids better than anyone and doesn't need people to second guess that decision. The decision is safe email with occasional supervision or continuing to share the parent's account under close supervision, and like most parents, he wants to find a way to be able to say yes.
If you don't have your own children, you have probably only seen the end result of good parenting, not all the effort that goes into it. What looks like a child doing something merely because a parent asks is actually the result of a long period of constantly adapting discipline and diplomacy with the most immature, illogical, demanding, self-centered, and emotional people you have ever met. That's not an insult to children, it's how we all start out. It's not something that most people can grasp only by learning about parenting, observing parents, or babysitting.
My vote is for "The computer has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down." How many times did I have to explain the police weren't going to come knocking on our door.
Actually, more of you own Microsoft stock than you think, at least indirectly through mutual funds. Much like so many people call for punishing oil company owners without realizing they probably are one.
let's teach people how to think for themselves, particularly how to fact-check sources
We always have taught that, in those liberal studies classes way too many students ignore because they "aren't useful in the real world." You can lead a horse to water...
Anyway, unless it is a primary source, I find it very difficult to get the full truth from any single web site. Generally, it requires reading all sides of the issue and realizing the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
If I had to make a rating system, I really like the wikipedia model. You can't believe everything you read on there, but if a statement is in doubt, there is almost always a "citation needed" tag on it, and if there is enough doubt about an entire article, it says so right at the top along with the reason. You may not be able to find the truth, but at least you know when to have stronger doubts. How often I have wished for a "citation needed" tag on other web sites.
Sorry, but the definition of a noteworthy accomplishment means people can remember it without using google.
trying to fire a state trooper who just happened to be fighting a custody battle with Sarah Palin's sister.
If he was just a guy who divorced her sister, I'd agree with you. However, even if she was directly involved in that, the guy deserved to be fired by any objective measure. He is accused of drunk driving, illegal hunting, firing a taser at his 11 year old stepson, threatening his father-in-law, and threatening the governor. There would be just as much scandal if he did all those things and didn't get fired because he happens to know the governor. The person who wouldn't fire the trooper and also wouldn't implement other budget and ethics reforms also deserved to get fired. It was completely within Governor Palin's power to do so.
She's been in elected office only slightly longer than Obama, true, but look at what she actually accomplished during that time. Ask an Obama supporter what he has actually accomplished in office, and the best reply I've heard is that he got elected to the U.S. Senate.
A lot of the things Obama has talked about doing as President, he could have spearheaded in the Senate and showed some real leadership there. Instead, he ignored that level of power and responsibility and immediately started campaigning for the next rung on the ladder.
Conversely, Governor Palin has walked the walk instead of just talking the talk, rooting out corruption and wasteful government spending, even in her own party. She has an 80-90% approval rating in her state, and could have easily gotten elected as one of Alaska's senators if that was what she set out to do. She never considered the Governorship as only a stepping stone to "bigger and better things."
Thinkgeek does indeed have some nice charging stations. I agree with you about the cell phone, as far as what you carry around. The only things I carry that need daily charging are my cell phone and earpiece, but I have the Portable Electronics Charging Station and love it. I added a receipt spike, so everything from my pockets—wallet, keys, sunglasses, receipts, cell phone, earpiece, and pocketknife—goes in one place when I get home. It hides most of the cords and looks like real furniture, which allows me to keep it out and easily accessible without my wife complaining.
Your view is common among those having trouble convincing someone to marry them. You and your friends have my condolences;-)
I do agree with you halfway. Too many people today think marriage is about themselves and therefore shouldn't require any effort to maintain. I disagree with your last point. I believe everyone can find lasting happiness with marriage if they approach it with the right attitude.
What was scary was, a few years back, I saw on TV where they took a classroom of kids, made up a scenario--soon the kids believed that scenario happened to them personally.
That's pretty common among kids, actually. The other day my 3-year-old caught me passing some gas. "Daddy, you farted!" "No I didn't, that was you." "It was?" "Yep." "Oh. 'scuse me."
Europe really does have a slight bluish tint. Something about different colored pollution than here. Your brain just filters it out.:)
Seriously, if you're having that much trouble with a camera built this century, either your camera is broken or you're not setting the white balance correctly. The quality of auto white balance algorithms varies considerably, but the custom setting and the presets are almost universally good, even among cheaper models.
White balance is probably the most common problem I see among new digital users. Digital works better among a larger variety of color and lighting scenarios, but film doesn't think your yellow shirts are supposed to be white and "helpfully" try to adjust the entire scene accordingly. In general, more expensive cameras have better automatic settings, and I've known amateurs who buy more expensive cameras for that sole reason and have been happy. However, on the boundary cases I've gotten better color results with a cheap compact than someone with an expensive SLR who didn't understand her white balance settings.
Given that those shows are dedicated to making a mockery of political discussion in this country I have nothing but contempt for any politician who would disgrace themselves by lending the air of legitimacy to them which they clearly don't deserve.
Thus, putting you clearly in the "solid liberal" camp to which most of my argument didn't apply. You're telling me you wouldn't get fired up hearing Obama give Rush the what for? Or are you afraid someone "illegitimate" will somehow trick a man who is allegedly qualified for the most powerful diplomatic position in the world into looking foolish in front of the biggest political audience in the country?
There are conservative fans of the show. While you enjoy that they are making fun of our political positions, we enjoy that the intentionally absurd arguments they make are so close to things actual democratic politicians say in all seriousness. While you're laughing directly at what they are saying, we're laughing at the people who would find it funny and the way they see us. It's a completely different experience, but no less entertaining. Sort of the way someone would enjoy a roast.
And a lot of the things they do are purely ad hominem. For example, you don't have to disagree with Bush politically to find the gaffes he makes humorous. When a democrat says something stupid they get made fun of just as much. It's actually very difficult to discern their true political leanings just from watching the show, if you watch with an open mind.
There are three facets to winning an election: energizing your base, attracting independents, and preventing your opponent from doing the same. People who were solidly in the other camp but cross over to vote for you are so rare as to be essentially negligible. Bearing that in mind, how would appearing on a hostile show help you energize your base and attract independents, or conversely, how would appearing on a hostile show help you avoid demoralizing your base, energizing your opponent's base, or repelling independents?
Let's take your example of a liberal democrat on the Rush Limbaugh show. First of all, studies show that something like 15-20% of Rush's audience does not agree with him, IIRC. An audience his size, that's a significant number in itself.
Second, even people who do not listen to the show will hear that you went on. If you are an independent or democrat and learned that Obama went on Rush, Hannity, or O'Reilly, how would that change your estimation of him? If you're an independent who knows Obama claims to be the right man to negotiate with dictators and tyrants, but is "afraid" to accept repeated invitations to those shows, how would that change your estimation of him? If you're a conservative who constantly hears those on-the-air invitations and know they're being refused, how does that help energize you?
The first time I solved this problem by moving into a fourplex and believing the landlord when she said a certain storage closet in the back was ours even though it had the wrong number on it. Then I came home one day and it had been emptied by the landlord and police when our neighbors were taken into custody for drug dealing. (Being able to afford to move out of there was one of my main motivations for finishing my college education).
The second time, I thought of creative ways to reuse parts from broken or obsolete equipment, then bought a few extra parts needed to make it work, but never actually built them, thus increasing the size of my junk pile. Uh wait, that doesn't actually help, but it is kind of surreal when you actually get around to a project and realize you're better stocked than your local Radio Shack.
Seriously, my recommendation is to get a few small plastic bins with lids, and organize the stuff you will probably want to use again. I have one for cables, one for wall-warts, one for things like routers and modems, and one with lots of dividers for electronic components. If there is one part I want from something that breaks, I strip out that one part and throw the rest out. That satisfies the pack rat in me without producing huge piles of junk.
Those of you who are concerned about contaminating the environment with lead, remember that the lead was in the environment to begin with. We have environmentalists screaming at miners not to take lead out of the ground, then they turn right around and scream at us when we try to put it back in somewhere else.
Slashdot Mirror
I used to write software for military aircraft. I wouldn't want an easter egg in there, either.
On the other hand, there's nothing wrong if you need any valid latitude and longitude for a target in an automated simulation test script, and just happen to choose your mother-in-law's house :-) You can leave your mark without being unprofessional or reckless about it.
This is what competition is for. I learned very early in my career that companies with labor forces represented by unions are usually the worst ones to work for. Think airlines, auto workers, call centers, and schools. It's impossible to tell where the cycle started, but draconian measures by management compel workers to strengthen their union and make more demands, which compels management to impose more draconian measures over the things they can control in order to keep their bottom line.
When it is more difficult to fire someone, they are always on the lookout for the tiniest fireable offense, and always on the lookout for new ways to cut costs and increase productivity within the bounds of their contract.
Basically, unions work very hard to help workers keep their crappy jobs at crappy companies. They also try to bargain for minimum productivity requirements so ridiculously low that the company has tremendous pressure to keep wages commensurately low. By doing both those things, unions are ultimately working against the best interests of those they represent.
Do yourself and your fellow workers a favor. Quit and go to work for a company that doesn't need a union to retain workers. There are plenty out there.
News flash: hardly anyone cares about the lack of women in computer science, either. If a bunch of women actually wanted to go into computer science and were refused, that would be a newsworthy story.
Wouldn't it be nice to be able to vote for different presidents for different issues? This year, it would probably work out to one "President of National Security" and one "President of Everything Else."
"Daddy, you farted!"
"No I didn't. That was you."
"It was?"
"Yep."
"Ohhh. 'Scuse me."
Fast forward 7 years:
"I want an iPod."
"That is an iPod."
"It is?"
"Yep."
"Cool. Thanks!"
I couldn't agree more. My wife tried to take a programming intro course and gave up because they asked her to make relatively complex algorithms to demonstrate mastery of simple syntax. She understood the coding just fine, but the teacher just assumed everyone understood algorithms. My wife also got hung up on minutia like "public static void main."
If I were to teach programming to someone like my wife, I would start out with something really simple like LOGO. Easy syntax and instant results. I would start out with simple sequencing. "What sequences of commands are necessary to draw a square, star, etc." Once they got that down, I'd move to iteration. "Did you notice you're repeating the same commands over and over? This is how you get the computer to do that for you." Then procedures and selection. "Write a procedure that asks what shape to draw and how big." Only after they got those basics down would I move to topics like compilers and data types.
Let's see...my undergrad alma mater consistently ranks in the top ten party schools. My graduate alma mater consistently ranks among the top ten football teams, and oh yeah, engineering programs. What was my most important factor in selecting them? Convenience to where I lived and worked at the time. Try to put that into an online service.
I was driving on the US Interstate, going about 80 mph ... I can either stay behind him and risk being caught in a pileup when he wrecks (not good); slow down to 55mph...
You have one of those cars that doesn't have any speeds between 55 and 80 too? I hate those new quantum engines.
The most dangerous drivers on the road are those who think they are routinely forced into dangerous acts by other drivers.
Exactly. Which is why my kids won't be allowed to date until they're married.
Until you've seen in real life a compiler error telling you that you accidentally tried to add a variable holding a distance in meters to one with a distance in feet, you don't know what you're talking about. Although people can find a way to break any language, some programming languages indeed are much more resistant to bugs than others.
Obviously, no such outrage exists. There isn't at least one complaint about the cost of the war on every remotely political discussion anywhere on the internet, even if Congress isn't currently debating the subject. Why am I even answering a nonexistent post?
Seriously, even if they disagree with a given war, nearly everyone recognizes defense spending in general as a legitimate, even fundamental function of government. Not so with buying illiquid assets.
Working tech support = good thing. Not having the sense to quit earlier = sign of incompetence :-)
Seriously, you're competing against recent graduates who have had contract work or internships with actual programming experience. I would suggest taking one of those, so an employer doesn't have to take as high a financial risk in hiring you. Bid low enough and eventually someone will bite.
Also, no offense because I've never met you, but be aware that companies will often reject someone for a different reason than the one they give, in order to keep from hurting your feelings or keep from getting themselves into legal trouble. A person who would reject you for a thin resume is going to reject you after reading your resume, and not waste time calling you in for an interview. You might want to get some professional help from a recruiter on your interview skills.
Parenting is something you learn by doing and learn by consulting people who have done. No offense, but most parents discount the advice of the childless because 1) we used to be one and remember how clueless we were, and 2) they come up to us all the time and tell us their clueless ideas. I won't say it's impossible for people without children to give meaningful parenting advice, just unlikely.
For example, the advice about setting a minimum age for using the internet is completely useless. First of all, what age do you set? When they start asking for their own email account makes a lot more sense than an arbitrary age set before you even know if they'll be interested or capable at that age. Second, you don't generally dump kids from 100% oversight to 100% independence when a certain birthday hits.
The OP has made the judgment that his kids are ready for an incremental amount of independence provided that they won't accidentally be exposed to inappropriate spam. He knows his kids better than anyone and doesn't need people to second guess that decision. The decision is safe email with occasional supervision or continuing to share the parent's account under close supervision, and like most parents, he wants to find a way to be able to say yes.
If you don't have your own children, you have probably only seen the end result of good parenting, not all the effort that goes into it. What looks like a child doing something merely because a parent asks is actually the result of a long period of constantly adapting discipline and diplomacy with the most immature, illogical, demanding, self-centered, and emotional people you have ever met. That's not an insult to children, it's how we all start out. It's not something that most people can grasp only by learning about parenting, observing parents, or babysitting.
My vote is for "The computer has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down." How many times did I have to explain the police weren't going to come knocking on our door.
Actually, more of you own Microsoft stock than you think, at least indirectly through mutual funds. Much like so many people call for punishing oil company owners without realizing they probably are one.
We always have taught that, in those liberal studies classes way too many students ignore because they "aren't useful in the real world." You can lead a horse to water...
Anyway, unless it is a primary source, I find it very difficult to get the full truth from any single web site. Generally, it requires reading all sides of the issue and realizing the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
If I had to make a rating system, I really like the wikipedia model. You can't believe everything you read on there, but if a statement is in doubt, there is almost always a "citation needed" tag on it, and if there is enough doubt about an entire article, it says so right at the top along with the reason. You may not be able to find the truth, but at least you know when to have stronger doubts. How often I have wished for a "citation needed" tag on other web sites.
Sorry, but the definition of a noteworthy accomplishment means people can remember it without using google.
If he was just a guy who divorced her sister, I'd agree with you. However, even if she was directly involved in that, the guy deserved to be fired by any objective measure. He is accused of drunk driving, illegal hunting, firing a taser at his 11 year old stepson, threatening his father-in-law, and threatening the governor. There would be just as much scandal if he did all those things and didn't get fired because he happens to know the governor. The person who wouldn't fire the trooper and also wouldn't implement other budget and ethics reforms also deserved to get fired. It was completely within Governor Palin's power to do so.
She's been in elected office only slightly longer than Obama, true, but look at what she actually accomplished during that time. Ask an Obama supporter what he has actually accomplished in office, and the best reply I've heard is that he got elected to the U.S. Senate.
A lot of the things Obama has talked about doing as President, he could have spearheaded in the Senate and showed some real leadership there. Instead, he ignored that level of power and responsibility and immediately started campaigning for the next rung on the ladder.
Conversely, Governor Palin has walked the walk instead of just talking the talk, rooting out corruption and wasteful government spending, even in her own party. She has an 80-90% approval rating in her state, and could have easily gotten elected as one of Alaska's senators if that was what she set out to do. She never considered the Governorship as only a stepping stone to "bigger and better things."
Thinkgeek does indeed have some nice charging stations. I agree with you about the cell phone, as far as what you carry around. The only things I carry that need daily charging are my cell phone and earpiece, but I have the Portable Electronics Charging Station and love it. I added a receipt spike, so everything from my pockets—wallet, keys, sunglasses, receipts, cell phone, earpiece, and pocketknife—goes in one place when I get home. It hides most of the cords and looks like real furniture, which allows me to keep it out and easily accessible without my wife complaining.
Your view is common among those having trouble convincing someone to marry them. You and your friends have my condolences ;-)
I do agree with you halfway. Too many people today think marriage is about themselves and therefore shouldn't require any effort to maintain. I disagree with your last point. I believe everyone can find lasting happiness with marriage if they approach it with the right attitude.
That's pretty common among kids, actually. The other day my 3-year-old caught me passing some gas. "Daddy, you farted!" "No I didn't, that was you." "It was?" "Yep." "Oh. 'scuse me."
Europe really does have a slight bluish tint. Something about different colored pollution than here. Your brain just filters it out. :)
Seriously, if you're having that much trouble with a camera built this century, either your camera is broken or you're not setting the white balance correctly. The quality of auto white balance algorithms varies considerably, but the custom setting and the presets are almost universally good, even among cheaper models.
White balance is probably the most common problem I see among new digital users. Digital works better among a larger variety of color and lighting scenarios, but film doesn't think your yellow shirts are supposed to be white and "helpfully" try to adjust the entire scene accordingly. In general, more expensive cameras have better automatic settings, and I've known amateurs who buy more expensive cameras for that sole reason and have been happy. However, on the boundary cases I've gotten better color results with a cheap compact than someone with an expensive SLR who didn't understand her white balance settings.
Thus, putting you clearly in the "solid liberal" camp to which most of my argument didn't apply. You're telling me you wouldn't get fired up hearing Obama give Rush the what for? Or are you afraid someone "illegitimate" will somehow trick a man who is allegedly qualified for the most powerful diplomatic position in the world into looking foolish in front of the biggest political audience in the country?
There are conservative fans of the show. While you enjoy that they are making fun of our political positions, we enjoy that the intentionally absurd arguments they make are so close to things actual democratic politicians say in all seriousness. While you're laughing directly at what they are saying, we're laughing at the people who would find it funny and the way they see us. It's a completely different experience, but no less entertaining. Sort of the way someone would enjoy a roast.
And a lot of the things they do are purely ad hominem. For example, you don't have to disagree with Bush politically to find the gaffes he makes humorous. When a democrat says something stupid they get made fun of just as much. It's actually very difficult to discern their true political leanings just from watching the show, if you watch with an open mind.
There are three facets to winning an election: energizing your base, attracting independents, and preventing your opponent from doing the same. People who were solidly in the other camp but cross over to vote for you are so rare as to be essentially negligible. Bearing that in mind, how would appearing on a hostile show help you energize your base and attract independents, or conversely, how would appearing on a hostile show help you avoid demoralizing your base, energizing your opponent's base, or repelling independents?
Let's take your example of a liberal democrat on the Rush Limbaugh show. First of all, studies show that something like 15-20% of Rush's audience does not agree with him, IIRC. An audience his size, that's a significant number in itself.
Second, even people who do not listen to the show will hear that you went on. If you are an independent or democrat and learned that Obama went on Rush, Hannity, or O'Reilly, how would that change your estimation of him? If you're an independent who knows Obama claims to be the right man to negotiate with dictators and tyrants, but is "afraid" to accept repeated invitations to those shows, how would that change your estimation of him? If you're a conservative who constantly hears those on-the-air invitations and know they're being refused, how does that help energize you?
The first time I solved this problem by moving into a fourplex and believing the landlord when she said a certain storage closet in the back was ours even though it had the wrong number on it. Then I came home one day and it had been emptied by the landlord and police when our neighbors were taken into custody for drug dealing. (Being able to afford to move out of there was one of my main motivations for finishing my college education).
The second time, I thought of creative ways to reuse parts from broken or obsolete equipment, then bought a few extra parts needed to make it work, but never actually built them, thus increasing the size of my junk pile. Uh wait, that doesn't actually help, but it is kind of surreal when you actually get around to a project and realize you're better stocked than your local Radio Shack.
Seriously, my recommendation is to get a few small plastic bins with lids, and organize the stuff you will probably want to use again. I have one for cables, one for wall-warts, one for things like routers and modems, and one with lots of dividers for electronic components. If there is one part I want from something that breaks, I strip out that one part and throw the rest out. That satisfies the pack rat in me without producing huge piles of junk.
Those of you who are concerned about contaminating the environment with lead, remember that the lead was in the environment to begin with. We have environmentalists screaming at miners not to take lead out of the ground, then they turn right around and scream at us when we try to put it back in somewhere else.