Hello, boys and girls. This is your old pal, Stinky Wizzleteats. This is a song about a whale. No! This is a song about being happy! That's right! It's the Happy Happy Joy Joy song!
Recruiters work for the employer, not the job-seeker. To a recruiter, I'm simply a product to be sold. There is no incentive to place ME in a job. All incentive is to place SOMEONE in the job so the recruiter can get the commission.
As soon as the one position for which I was originally contacted is closed, I'm dropped from the radar completely and forgotten.
Employers pay the commission. There's no incentive whatsoever to help me, the job seeker.
that posts that put part of the first sentence in the subject rarely get scored above a 2? Personally, they irritate me so I refuse to mod them up. Maybe it's just coincidence that the people who put part of the sentence in the subject write posts with content that deserve mods of 2 or less.
The parent post seems to offer some good advice about the SBA though with nothing to back it up. There is also a new link that I hadn't noticed in other posts for a resource at inc.com. I would have thought it would warrant a 2+ mod. Perhaps there is something to my theory about the subject line.
I agree with what you are saying and wish it worked that way in real life.
Let's see how this plays out:
randomvictim is a raging wank-monkey.
[edit by randomvictim]Some people believe [/edit]randomvictim is a raging wank-monkey[edit by randomvictim], but really he's not.[/edit]
From randomvictim's perspective, it's accurate but still extremely hurtful and perhaps detrimental to his political career.
From a user's perspective, either I'll disregard the entry entirely because "raging wank-monkey" is a more than a little childish or I'll have some concerns about randomvictim's choice of hobbies. Either way, there is little good for randomvictim in leaving this entry unedited.
Of course, the history would still be there if it were edited directly and "corrected," even by randomvictim, but at least the initial impression of the article would be better.
Reality bites. Unfortunately, there's no perfect solution. All we can do is take the lesser of the evils, a subjective approach at best.
Like usually happens, I do not read the subject line for most messages. It just happens that way. MOST people know not to put important information in there so I've been trained that reading the subject line is not necessary and is usually redundant.
Interestingly enough, your message fit perfectly. It started with "you wouldn't give me the job." I'm now thinking, you're darned right! You put half a sentence into the part of the message I rarely read.
[Deep breath, there I'm feeling better. The rant is over]
As a side note, this is a good sales point for a catchy sig. It is the only way I will follow an individual's postings. Since I do not see the handle, a sig allows me to recognize someone's posts when I see them again.
The problem with hypnotism is that it installs commands in the mind. The hypnotist does then not remove the first command, he installs a second command telling it to ignore the first.
Subsequently whenever the first one is restimulated the subject will have this conflict going on. - Follow / Don't follow the command.
Not really what you want to have going on, having urges that some hypnotist installed in your mind, for the rest of your life.
You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you?
The hard part for Google is that if they implemented this, people would immediately think that just because Google didn't say "HEY, DUMMY! This site is not safe!" they are safe. If Google doesn't catch a specific exploit or doesn't crawl a site soon enough, people would assume it's OK.
People wouldn't take this feature as a last-ditch safety net. They'd believe it is a complete endorsement of the safety of sites that haven't been caught yet.
Google has to assume people will think the worst and decide if it is good for them to offer anything at all if they are not able to offer 100%.
[cue Simpsons episode]
Bill: Buy him out boys
Boys: [smash all of Homer's "office" equipment]
Homer: Hey!
Bill: I didn't get this rich by writing a lot of checks
OK, that almost made me fall off my chair. I thought I was the only one able to pare down this extremely long sentence to less than half the words with the exact same meaning.
I guess they think that if everyone falls into a drooling coma reading his statements, he wins by default.
Perhaps the source for this is a bit easier to figure out than the one MS implemented. I looked briefly at the Javascript but did not analyze it. It is well formatted and documented.
When you aren't aware of the importance of shrinking down that huge "jpeg" you took with your digital camera before mass mailing it to all your friends and family who have email addresses?
Knowing about files and their sizes is a basic part of operating a computer. That's like driving a car and not knowing that you have to change the oil.
That reminds me. I kept getting emailed Word documents from a coworker where the fonts always came out odd. The fonts were always Arial 4pt. I just could not figure out where the document was getting mangled. She had learned that her attachments were too big. She was shrinking the font to make them smaller.
There is a large amount of learning to do about computers. Unfortunately, there's no single baseline for "you've learned enough, you're no longer dangerous." She thought she knew enough to make her attachments smaller. How would she have known she did not know enough without someone patient enough to explain the differences to her?
We need to be patient in the IT world. People have no idea what they don't know. They think they know enough. We need to teach them (not tell them) the difference.
I copy-pasted it into a text file and then unzipped it only to get an error "missing end signature--probably not a zip file".
Unfortunately, when the original poster pasted it into the web form, the non-printable characters weren't included. You'll have to get a.SXW file from another source (get OO.o, you'll like) and try the experiment.
Slashdot Mirror
Hello, boys and girls. This is your old pal, Stinky Wizzleteats. This is a song about a whale. No! This is a song about being happy! That's right! It's the Happy Happy Joy Joy song!
Recruiters work for the employer, not the job-seeker. To a recruiter, I'm simply a product to be sold. There is no incentive to place ME in a job. All incentive is to place SOMEONE in the job so the recruiter can get the commission.
As soon as the one position for which I was originally contacted is closed, I'm dropped from the radar completely and forgotten.
Employers pay the commission. There's no incentive whatsoever to help me, the job seeker.
that posts that put part of the first sentence in the subject rarely get scored above a 2? Personally, they irritate me so I refuse to mod them up. Maybe it's just coincidence that the people who put part of the sentence in the subject write posts with content that deserve mods of 2 or less.
The parent post seems to offer some good advice about the SBA though with nothing to back it up. There is also a new link that I hadn't noticed in other posts for a resource at inc.com. I would have thought it would warrant a 2+ mod. Perhaps there is something to my theory about the subject line.
You are this concerned about privacy that you're concerned about cookie lifetime but you're not using Privoxy?
Check out Privoxy to manage these settings centrally regardless of browser. It does much more as well.
I agree with what you are saying and wish it worked that way in real life.
Let's see how this plays out:
randomvictim is a raging wank-monkey.
[edit by randomvictim]Some people believe [/edit]randomvictim is a raging wank-monkey[edit by randomvictim], but really he's not.[/edit]
From randomvictim's perspective, it's accurate but still extremely hurtful and perhaps detrimental to his political career.
From a user's perspective, either I'll disregard the entry entirely because "raging wank-monkey" is a more than a little childish or I'll have some concerns about randomvictim's choice of hobbies. Either way, there is little good for randomvictim in leaving this entry unedited.
Of course, the history would still be there if it were edited directly and "corrected," even by randomvictim, but at least the initial impression of the article would be better.
Reality bites. Unfortunately, there's no perfect solution. All we can do is take the lesser of the evils, a subjective approach at best.
Good luck with that!
Like usually happens, I do not read the subject line for most messages. It just happens that way. MOST people know not to put important information in there so I've been trained that reading the subject line is not necessary and is usually redundant.
Interestingly enough, your message fit perfectly. It started with "you wouldn't give me the job." I'm now thinking, you're darned right! You put half a sentence into the part of the message I rarely read.
[Deep breath, there I'm feeling better. The rant is over]
As a side note, this is a good sales point for a catchy sig. It is the only way I will follow an individual's postings. Since I do not see the handle, a sig allows me to recognize someone's posts when I see them again.
Man, two personal friends of yours get killed plus another at a local store. Where do you live? I'd consider moving.
I never DID like that off-white room in your house. I'll be over at 8:00. Oh, by the way, I'm bringing a couple gallons of a very nice blue paint.
"Tap his keyboard." That's funny!
OK, If I have to do it....
Lisa: But you have recruiting ads on TV. Why do you need subliminal messages?
Smash: It's a three-pronged attack. Subliminal, liminal, and superliminal.
Lisa: Superliminal?
Smash: I'll show you. (opens the window and shouts at Lenny and Carl, who are standing on the corner) Hey, you! Join the Navy!
Carl: Uh, yeah, all right.
Lenny: I'm in.
The hard part for Google is that if they implemented this, people would immediately think that just because Google didn't say "HEY, DUMMY! This site is not safe!" they are safe. If Google doesn't catch a specific exploit or doesn't crawl a site soon enough, people would assume it's OK.
People wouldn't take this feature as a last-ditch safety net. They'd believe it is a complete endorsement of the safety of sites that haven't been caught yet.
Google has to assume people will think the worst and decide if it is good for them to offer anything at all if they are not able to offer 100%.
Teach a man to build a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Set him on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
[cue Simpsons episode]
Bill: Buy him out boys
Boys: [smash all of Homer's "office" equipment]
Homer: Hey!
Bill: I didn't get this rich by writing a lot of checks
OK, that almost made me fall off my chair. I thought I was the only one able to pare down this extremely long sentence to less than half the words with the exact same meaning.
I guess they think that if everyone falls into a drooling coma reading his statements, he wins by default.
Um. This won't run. The point is funnier with the "not true" thing and all but it kinda loses something when you lose the whole litigate(); procedure.
There is a script for Greasemonkey for Firefox that provides this functionality.
k ey-netflix-queue-manager to see it.
Check out http://badsegue.org/archives/2005/06/04/greasemon
Perhaps the source for this is a bit easier to figure out than the one MS implemented. I looked briefly at the Javascript but did not analyze it. It is well formatted and documented.
Sure, go ahead and put your Ebay username and password onto that many machines. I'm sure nothing bad could come of that.
When you aren't aware of the importance of shrinking down that huge "jpeg" you took with your digital camera before mass mailing it to all your friends and family who have email addresses?
Knowing about files and their sizes is a basic part of operating a computer. That's like driving a car and not knowing that you have to change the oil.
That reminds me. I kept getting emailed Word documents from a coworker where the fonts always came out odd. The fonts were always Arial 4pt. I just could not figure out where the document was getting mangled. She had learned that her attachments were too big. She was shrinking the font to make them smaller.
There is a large amount of learning to do about computers. Unfortunately, there's no single baseline for "you've learned enough, you're no longer dangerous." She thought she knew enough to make her attachments smaller. How would she have known she did not know enough without someone patient enough to explain the differences to her?
We need to be patient in the IT world. People have no idea what they don't know. They think they know enough. We need to teach them (not tell them) the difference.
Teach, it's the only way.
Service Oriented Architecture. A way of organizing an IT group to be "service oriented" instead of just being another cost center.
[buzzzz][buzzzzz] Anybody hear the buzzing?
Unfortunately, when the original poster pasted it into the web form, the non-printable characters weren't included. You'll have to get a