I get the impression they're not terribly interested in grabbing up the anti-social hackers we're picturing. I expect they're looking to develop their own people to a point where they're very good at very singular, near-mechanical tasks, and contract the rest out to the private sector. Hell, that's how everything else gets done. Let a company design and build the new machine, train someone to change the oil and replace parts.
Sure. You're kinda damned if you do, damned if you don't. If you're not VERY careful about what you say, you'll get something plucked out of context and ruin your career. If you ARE careful, you're not answering the questions satisfactorily. Hell, I know what I'd choose.
Not to mention, most of these questions are best answered by someone other than the General.
Generals are not meant to make (or really comment on) political policy. I wish someone had pounded this home before the questions were submitted. As it is, I knew the answer to most of these questions before I got to the answer, and I'm not involved in AFCC at all.
It's not that they're silly questions, just that they're for someone else.
Wow... yeah I was picturing what would have happened if my old man took me to the grocery store and I so much as pouted about not getting a particular box of cereal. Not something I'd have even considered.
This is the same guy that, having noticed my bicycle left on the front porch (in a nice suburb), loaded it into a truck and took it to his warehouse. I mean, people don't lock their car doors in a store parking lot where I grew up. Then he let me think it'd been stolen for about a week, and made sure I knew it was due to my own carelessness.
Never had a bike stolen though... lesson learned, I guess.:)
As I've said many times before, I'm not a religious guy. However, I can see how a faith based system does not require proof, but a proof based system does. It's not so much an unfair demand from religious people on science, it's that the practice of good science simply requires testable theories and proof (er, evidence).
Let's rise above lumping some wacky creation science folks in with all the religious people of the world, eh? A shotgun approach of stereotyping religious people shoots brilliant people like Hawking in the face too, ya'know.
To which the response from Mayor Daley will be, "we just need more cameras". If history tells us anything, you can bet that the company that gets the contract for any new cameras and centralization work is owned by one of Daley's buddies/family? Welcome to Chicago!
I'm an IT guy now who also wears a dozen hats. I'm also a Business Management student, and a frequent topic of discussion is about generational differences in the American workforce. It's been noted that past generations would trade all kinds of job satisfaction in return for job security. More recent generations are not so willing. Businesses have also changed. Companies expect greater turnover, are more flexible than they used to be, and operate "leaner" than they used to.
There's always room for the guy (or god forbid, girl) that wants to specialize in one particular function of one particular line of devices by one particular company (Cisco guys out there, you know what I'm talking about). But in a lot of ways the game has changed, and it does reflect your personal preferences, both in textbooks and in real life. Mine too, incidentally.
What? No they don't, the passengers are blocking the aisles. The crew stand at the front of the plane, with a couple further back to assist other passengers.
As an occasional first class passenger I've always wondered why they ask you to seat first and deal with every other passenger coughing on you and bouncing their carry-ons off of you while they wait forever to be seated because some goof can't shoehorn enough of his stuff in the overhead. I'd have no objection to boarding last, whatsoever.
Yeah, it took a long time with phreaking. Maybe it has to do with the transition to more secure systems, where tinkerers don't really play anymore... you have to really set out to make trouble. The history of gaming phone systems is decades older than I am. I'm pretty sure I wasn't even born yet when blue boxes and cap'n crunch whistles still worked. Too lazy to fact-check that.:)
But for all the fun we had in the mid-to-late 90's with cell phones, phone cans, red boxes (thinking we're somehow clever changing out one part), etc., we never hurt anyone. We never wanted to. It was about tinkering with fun little stuff that maybe only a handful of friends thought was neat. None of us thought we were particularly special, it was just fun with a hint of trouble. We could have gotten the same result he did without being caught, even then... but we never even would have considered it.
This little bastard needs the book thrown at him. Yes, we probably deserved a slap on the wrist for costing the system a few dollars... but recklessly endangering peoples' health and safety is messed up.
what's the point of getting "notable members of the gaming industry" to sign a product that has a guaranteed maximum lifespan? Wouldn't taking a polaroid and having them sign that be a better way to preserve those memories?
Seems a silly question. Let me ask you this, would you rather have an original Nintendo signed by the people who made Super Mario Bros., or a long-since faded polaroid picture of a Nintendo with scrawl covering the picture?
Examples? For instance, his book and speaking tour called, "The God Delusion".
I'm not alone in this... people wiser than me agree that he's less interested in delivering truths, and more in attacking people who disagree. That is his bread and butter.
I'm the last person that would say religion is beyond critique, but being abusive over something that is necessarily faith-based smacks of media-whoring, not science.
I never hear talk of banning, but specifically with Dawkins, he outright abusive towards anyone who is religious. They're said to be ignorant, even delusional. I'm not, personally, but that guy even turns my stomach.
I see where you're confused. Not all religious people are creationists, and not all scientists are atheists. The vast swath in between actually represents the majority. Religion and science need not be mutually exclusive pursuits in a person. Be upset about attempts to pervert science in school, that's fine, and let them be upset about douchebags who insist that going to church on Sunday makes you incapable of contributing to science. Both are equally retarded.
It seems the scientific method as a series of steps covers your scenario quite nicely by allowing for imagination and bizarre ideas. You start with a hypothesis. There are no stipulations on where it comes from. Well, at least from what I remember of Jr. High science classes.:)
Just because something has steps doesn't mean it can't involve creativity, intuition and imagination. I think that's part of the glitz and glam that people skip over (maybe to enhance credibility?) when presenting research. Tell us a story, frame your work in a larger context, and we're more likely to care. Otherwise it's all just a bunch of numbers... and I know it seems silly, but that's just boring.
Someone mentioned the space race earlier, and how it was the peak of national interest in science. Notice there was a really cool context... people going into space on big machines and landing on the moon. Nobody was interested in the new chemical composition of the batteries used without the context of how it applied to landing on the moon. Then we want to know every detail!
I've never been a big fan of our current health system, or the idea of "universal health care", but I'll take the suckers position and say, I kinda like the idea of being able to vote with my dollar. I just wish other people would do the same, and demand certain levels of service and quality of care.
While the whole universal health care thing seems nice to me, in theory, I think it can be argued that most anything our (USA) government runs entirely on tax dollars is shitty and backwards. Our soldiers have the worlds greatest weapons, mounted on vehicles with no armor. Our postal system is a joke. At least in the state of Illinois, we pay through the nose for upkeep on our roads, and yet we have some of the worst I've seen anywhere in the world (I've been to fewer than 10 countries and fewer than 20 states, mind you). Don't get me started on other state services (motor vehicles, revenue, etc). One could spend weeks talking about how the government just sucks at... well... everything they manage. I could spend the same amount of time trying to think of ONE thing (that benefits me) that they do really well. Perhaps the only thing they usually do just OK at is collecting taxes.
I dunno, I guess I just don't trust my government to do much of anything where private industry could do it instead, and customers could make changes to the system by taking their dollars elsewhere, demanding things that are important to them, and planning appropriately. Government run services usually require ridiculous, cumbersome, ineffective acts of law to get anything changed.
You know, I think the silent winner here is OpenDNS. I've been using their service at our company for about a year now, and never a glitch. I've also seen very few references to them... to a point where I've felt compelled to evangelize for them a bit. Now their name is everywhere, in a good, geeky way.:)
Slashdot Mirror
I'd expect this is done, with some kind of oversight, through private contractors.
I get the impression they're not terribly interested in grabbing up the anti-social hackers we're picturing. I expect they're looking to develop their own people to a point where they're very good at very singular, near-mechanical tasks, and contract the rest out to the private sector. Hell, that's how everything else gets done. Let a company design and build the new machine, train someone to change the oil and replace parts.
Sure. You're kinda damned if you do, damned if you don't. If you're not VERY careful about what you say, you'll get something plucked out of context and ruin your career. If you ARE careful, you're not answering the questions satisfactorily. Hell, I know what I'd choose.
Not to mention, most of these questions are best answered by someone other than the General.
Generals are not meant to make (or really comment on) political policy. I wish someone had pounded this home before the questions were submitted. As it is, I knew the answer to most of these questions before I got to the answer, and I'm not involved in AFCC at all.
It's not that they're silly questions, just that they're for someone else.
Wow... yeah I was picturing what would have happened if my old man took me to the grocery store and I so much as pouted about not getting a particular box of cereal. Not something I'd have even considered.
:)
This is the same guy that, having noticed my bicycle left on the front porch (in a nice suburb), loaded it into a truck and took it to his warehouse. I mean, people don't lock their car doors in a store parking lot where I grew up. Then he let me think it'd been stolen for about a week, and made sure I knew it was due to my own carelessness.
Never had a bike stolen though... lesson learned, I guess.
I wish I had his girlfriend... that's clever AND sexy. ;)
As I've said many times before, I'm not a religious guy. However, I can see how a faith based system does not require proof, but a proof based system does. It's not so much an unfair demand from religious people on science, it's that the practice of good science simply requires testable theories and proof (er, evidence).
Let's rise above lumping some wacky creation science folks in with all the religious people of the world, eh? A shotgun approach of stereotyping religious people shoots brilliant people like Hawking in the face too, ya'know.
To which the response from Mayor Daley will be, "we just need more cameras". If history tells us anything, you can bet that the company that gets the contract for any new cameras and centralization work is owned by one of Daley's buddies/family? Welcome to Chicago!
You're not alone.
I'm an IT guy now who also wears a dozen hats. I'm also a Business Management student, and a frequent topic of discussion is about generational differences in the American workforce. It's been noted that past generations would trade all kinds of job satisfaction in return for job security. More recent generations are not so willing. Businesses have also changed. Companies expect greater turnover, are more flexible than they used to be, and operate "leaner" than they used to.
There's always room for the guy (or god forbid, girl) that wants to specialize in one particular function of one particular line of devices by one particular company (Cisco guys out there, you know what I'm talking about). But in a lot of ways the game has changed, and it does reflect your personal preferences, both in textbooks and in real life. Mine too, incidentally.
Wow dude, thanks for speaking for me. I was too busy not getting laid to be bothered to type it myself.
I think there's something to be said for thin people, not motivated chaos. :)
What? No they don't, the passengers are blocking the aisles. The crew stand at the front of the plane, with a couple further back to assist other passengers.
As an occasional first class passenger I've always wondered why they ask you to seat first and deal with every other passenger coughing on you and bouncing their carry-ons off of you while they wait forever to be seated because some goof can't shoehorn enough of his stuff in the overhead. I'd have no objection to boarding last, whatsoever.
I just threw up in my mouth a little.
Yeah, it took a long time with phreaking. Maybe it has to do with the transition to more secure systems, where tinkerers don't really play anymore... you have to really set out to make trouble. The history of gaming phone systems is decades older than I am. I'm pretty sure I wasn't even born yet when blue boxes and cap'n crunch whistles still worked. Too lazy to fact-check that. :)
But for all the fun we had in the mid-to-late 90's with cell phones, phone cans, red boxes (thinking we're somehow clever changing out one part), etc., we never hurt anyone. We never wanted to. It was about tinkering with fun little stuff that maybe only a handful of friends thought was neat. None of us thought we were particularly special, it was just fun with a hint of trouble. We could have gotten the same result he did without being caught, even then... but we never even would have considered it.
This little bastard needs the book thrown at him. Yes, we probably deserved a slap on the wrist for costing the system a few dollars... but recklessly endangering peoples' health and safety is messed up.
what's the point of getting "notable members of the gaming industry" to sign a product that has a guaranteed maximum lifespan? Wouldn't taking a polaroid and having them sign that be a better way to preserve those memories?
Seems a silly question. Let me ask you this, would you rather have an original Nintendo signed by the people who made Super Mario Bros., or a long-since faded polaroid picture of a Nintendo with scrawl covering the picture?
Examples? For instance, his book and speaking tour called, "The God Delusion".
I'm not alone in this... people wiser than me agree that he's less interested in delivering truths, and more in attacking people who disagree. That is his bread and butter.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-_2xGIwQfik&feature=related
I'm the last person that would say religion is beyond critique, but being abusive over something that is necessarily faith-based smacks of media-whoring, not science.
Wow, I'm going to be abusing the shit out of that exceptionally nerdy post.
Please don't sue.
I never hear talk of banning, but specifically with Dawkins, he outright abusive towards anyone who is religious. They're said to be ignorant, even delusional. I'm not, personally, but that guy even turns my stomach.
I see where you're confused. Not all religious people are creationists, and not all scientists are atheists. The vast swath in between actually represents the majority. Religion and science need not be mutually exclusive pursuits in a person. Be upset about attempts to pervert science in school, that's fine, and let them be upset about douchebags who insist that going to church on Sunday makes you incapable of contributing to science. Both are equally retarded.
It seems the scientific method as a series of steps covers your scenario quite nicely by allowing for imagination and bizarre ideas. You start with a hypothesis. There are no stipulations on where it comes from. Well, at least from what I remember of Jr. High science classes. :)
Just because something has steps doesn't mean it can't involve creativity, intuition and imagination. I think that's part of the glitz and glam that people skip over (maybe to enhance credibility?) when presenting research. Tell us a story, frame your work in a larger context, and we're more likely to care. Otherwise it's all just a bunch of numbers... and I know it seems silly, but that's just boring.
Someone mentioned the space race earlier, and how it was the peak of national interest in science. Notice there was a really cool context... people going into space on big machines and landing on the moon. Nobody was interested in the new chemical composition of the batteries used without the context of how it applied to landing on the moon. Then we want to know every detail!
I've never been a big fan of our current health system, or the idea of "universal health care", but I'll take the suckers position and say, I kinda like the idea of being able to vote with my dollar. I just wish other people would do the same, and demand certain levels of service and quality of care.
While the whole universal health care thing seems nice to me, in theory, I think it can be argued that most anything our (USA) government runs entirely on tax dollars is shitty and backwards. Our soldiers have the worlds greatest weapons, mounted on vehicles with no armor. Our postal system is a joke. At least in the state of Illinois, we pay through the nose for upkeep on our roads, and yet we have some of the worst I've seen anywhere in the world (I've been to fewer than 10 countries and fewer than 20 states, mind you). Don't get me started on other state services (motor vehicles, revenue, etc). One could spend weeks talking about how the government just sucks at... well... everything they manage. I could spend the same amount of time trying to think of ONE thing (that benefits me) that they do really well. Perhaps the only thing they usually do just OK at is collecting taxes.
I dunno, I guess I just don't trust my government to do much of anything where private industry could do it instead, and customers could make changes to the system by taking their dollars elsewhere, demanding things that are important to them, and planning appropriately. Government run services usually require ridiculous, cumbersome, ineffective acts of law to get anything changed.
Cataloging and Acquisitions I would think...
http://www.loc.gov/aba/contact/
All the way at the bottom.
I'm using this one, someone please post if there's a more appropriate place.
The amazing part is that now we think it's normal to answer idiotic questions like that.
How about rain water run-off? Can we get a wheel into my downspouts? I forsee a problem with batteries... which are expensive and inefficient.
How about just a water wheel? Thousands of years of innovation, and we're back to square one. :)
You know, I think the silent winner here is OpenDNS. I've been using their service at our company for about a year now, and never a glitch. I've also seen very few references to them... to a point where I've felt compelled to evangelize for them a bit. Now their name is everywhere, in a good, geeky way. :)