Whatever is the trendy growth (even more than money) field when kids are juniors/seniors in high school, will then have a glut of kids taking a relevant major in college. They never seem to think, for whatever reason, that the job situation won't be the same in 4-8 years.. That's one of the reasons teaching (I was married to a teacher, and have a number friends who are)degrees take such gigantic leaps from feast to famine and back. The news says "there's a shortage", and a few years later says "there's a glut"
The only thing new here is this is basically the FIRST time this cycle has taken place in the computer industry. The field has changed a lot, due to it's newness, but that also happens to every field going through it's infancy.
I'd rather see the evidence myself. And I'm sure that, if there were any, we would have. I doubt the Democrats would have demured due to decorum.
Picking nits
Actually, the public word of the Supreme Court was: 1)We grant the temporary injunction, until we rule on the case. (Whether or not they should have, is another matter) 2)OK, you can (re-re-re) count the votes, but that doesn't change the federal deadline to have the results certified.
Actually, there was a lawsuit and claim with the FEC (I wanna say Al Sharpton was the point man, but honestly don't remember). Both the courts and the FEC threw the claims out as being without any basis in fact. Not that that'll stop certain parties from whining.
Re:SCO has Dirty Hands. Will not be able to collec
on
SCO To Show Copied Code
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Really, you can't force companies to reveal their source code with technicalities, no matter how much the company's management are being jerks, without it setting off alarm bells in management at all companies.
Interestingly, enough, that is irrelevant. Nobody is saying SCO used the GPL, and must now hand over it's source (at least in the context of this discussion). *SCO* is claiming that developers misappropriated SCO IP in the form of code. It is being replied that: 1)SCO has a duty to minimize damage -by saying WHAT, specifically, is being used improperly and, 2)Since SCO released it's own version of linux under the GPL, the code (assuming SCO used it's code in the distro, after all, they haven't said WHAT code is at issue...) is licensed under the GPL.
Near the end, Jean valiantly gives her life to save the team. There is much sadness. Camera cuts to a placid lake created when dam burst (killing Jean). Camera cuts to Prof X, who smiles & says that he thinks everything will be OK, or words to that effect. Odds are, he sensed Jean's mind. X-3 will be Dark Phoenix, or I'll be seduced by Natalie Portman.
Making it a full time job means taking it as seriously as you take/took a "real" job (assuming that you take a real job seriously, that is). It's a research, planning, and marketing job, btw. Research what you want to do, and who/what could hire you to do it. Whether or not they have an ad in the newspaper/job site or not. Know about that employer in detail BEFORE you go for the interview. Before you apply, if feasable. Develop and follow a plan to make sure you leave no stone unturned, no lead left unfollowed, no assistance left unthanked. Market yourself as the candidate to scratch that employer's itch.
And excellent resource is (any year's) What color is your parachute? It can be ordered through Amazon Done well, a job search is EASILY a 60+ hour a week job. AND a hard job at that. But it's your future you're working on. Oh, and as another poster replied, you're up, shaved, and dressed (professional) before 8 AM, though I'd say 6:30.
That would be ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO A BEOWULF CLUSTER OF NATALIE PORTMAN!!!! Kids these days, I tell ya...
Here is some more text to get around the lamenes filter
As I mentioned in my other post, most orgs have programmers on staff. Now, let's assume they don't. Which is better: 1)"We have a broken app, and the company went out of business. We're screwed" OR 2)"We have a broken app, and the company went out of business. We need to hire an "expensive consultant" to fix the source code we have on CD." *I* know which one I'd rather be saying. YMMV.
I think you are mistaken. My organization, and most large organizations, have programmers ON STAFF! (I happen to be one.) I'll try to explain the business benefit in little words: IF vendor goes out of business THEN we will be able to maintain the app (business requirement changes, OS upgrades, etc -As mentioned in my origional post). If you don't want to see that as a benefit, that is your right.
You're going to need a better argument. No, actually, I didn't.
Even in an "enterprise level" organization, there tend to be numerous niche applications. In mine, (and we basically belong to the evil from Redmond), a number of applications' vendors HAVE gone out of business.
If you read what I said, I didn't say that my employer cared about source code. What I said was that we would be guaranteed the ABILITY to have the app maintained, regardless of the vendor. (HINT: That's "the business benefit" being brought to the table)
I believe it is much more of a sneery techie answer to just assume that management is completely impervious to logic. Oh, and it worked, btw. And as an aside, most businesses of any size are in the software development business, whether they want to be or not. (they just don't sell it.)
But in that case, I wouldn't care. I'm not so much concerned about F(f)ree software at work. I'm concerned with access/maintainability. Btw, kudos to your organization for taking such a reasonable stand.
Key words from the (invalid, but that's another thread) EULA: "To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law" So, even microsoft acknowledges that it can't completely hand-wave away the warranties the grandparent poster referenced.
Slashdot Mirror
Whatever is the trendy growth (even more than money) field when kids are juniors/seniors in high school, will then have a glut of kids taking a relevant major in college.
They never seem to think, for whatever reason, that the job situation won't be the same in 4-8 years..
That's one of the reasons teaching (I was married to a teacher, and have a number friends who are)degrees take such gigantic leaps from feast to famine and back. The news says "there's a shortage", and a few years later says "there's a glut"
The only thing new here is this is basically the FIRST time this cycle has taken place in the computer industry. The field has changed a lot, due to it's newness, but that also happens to every field going through it's infancy.
King George, his heirs or assigns, or any other jerks who feel that what's mine is thiers. But that's a flame for a different day. :-P~~
Well, a few of us are still carrying a grudge from that whole tea tax thing.
4 fp posts, and the link is /.'ed
Stop us before we link again!!! Bawahh!!
Dude, you owe me one keyboard cleaning!
Thx, You made my day!
Looks a lot like DOS.
I'd rather see the evidence myself.
And I'm sure that, if there were any, we would have. I doubt the Democrats would have demured due to decorum.
Picking nits
Actually, the public word of the Supreme Court was:
1)We grant the temporary injunction, until we rule on the case. (Whether or not they should have, is another matter)
2)OK, you can (re-re-re) count the votes, but that doesn't change the federal deadline to have the results certified.
Actually, there was a lawsuit and claim with the FEC (I wanna say Al Sharpton was the point man, but honestly don't remember). Both the courts and the FEC threw the claims out as being without any basis in fact.
Not that that'll stop certain parties from whining.
Really, you can't force companies to reveal their source code with technicalities, no matter how much the company's management are being jerks, without it setting off alarm bells in management at all companies.
Interestingly, enough, that is irrelevant.
Nobody is saying SCO used the GPL, and must now hand over it's source (at least in the context of this discussion).
*SCO* is claiming that developers misappropriated SCO IP in the form of code.
It is being replied that:
1)SCO has a duty to minimize damage -by saying WHAT, specifically, is being used improperly and,
2)Since SCO released it's own version of linux under the GPL, the code (assuming SCO used it's code in the distro, after all, they haven't said WHAT code is at issue...) is licensed under the GPL.
And me w/o mod points.
Of course, I don't know if you'd get funny, insightful, or redundant (as in blindingly obvious).
LOL
Near the end, Jean valiantly gives her life to save the team.
There is much sadness.
Camera cuts to a placid lake created when dam burst (killing Jean).
Camera cuts to Prof X, who smiles & says that he thinks everything will be OK, or words to that effect.
Odds are, he sensed Jean's mind.
X-3 will be Dark Phoenix, or I'll be seduced by Natalie Portman.
Making it a full time job means taking it as seriously as you take/took a "real" job (assuming that you take a real job seriously, that is).
It's a research, planning, and marketing job, btw.
Research what you want to do, and who/what could hire you to do it. Whether or not they have an ad in the newspaper/job site or not. Know about that employer in detail BEFORE you go for the interview. Before you apply, if feasable.
Develop and follow a plan to make sure you leave no stone unturned, no lead left unfollowed, no assistance left unthanked.
Market yourself as the candidate to scratch that employer's itch.
And excellent resource is (any year's) What color is your parachute? It can be ordered through Amazon Done well, a job search is EASILY a 60+ hour a week job. AND a hard job at that. But it's your future you're working on.
Oh, and as another poster replied, you're up, shaved, and dressed (professional) before 8 AM, though I'd say 6:30.
EMarketersAmerica.org, a fledgling secret organization of spammers
NOTE: secret organizations should NOT file public lawsuits.
That would be ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO A BEOWULF CLUSTER OF NATALIE PORTMAN!!!!
Kids these days, I tell ya... Here is some more text to get around the lamenes filter
As I mentioned in my other post, most orgs have programmers on staff.
Now, let's assume they don't. Which is better:
1)"We have a broken app, and the company went out of business. We're screwed" OR
2)"We have a broken app, and the company went out of business. We need to hire an "expensive consultant" to fix the source code we have on CD."
*I* know which one I'd rather be saying. YMMV.
I think you are mistaken. My organization, and most large organizations, have programmers ON STAFF! (I happen to be one.)
I'll try to explain the business benefit in little words: IF vendor goes out of business THEN we will be able to maintain the app (business requirement changes, OS upgrades, etc -As mentioned in my origional post).
If you don't want to see that as a benefit, that is your right.
You're going to need a better argument.
No, actually, I didn't.
Even in an "enterprise level" organization, there tend to be numerous niche applications. In mine, (and we basically belong to the evil from Redmond), a number of applications' vendors HAVE gone out of business.
If you read what I said, I didn't say that my employer cared about source code. What I said was that we would be guaranteed the ABILITY to have the app maintained, regardless of the vendor. (HINT: That's "the business benefit" being brought to the table)
I believe it is much more of a sneery techie answer to just assume that management is completely impervious to logic. Oh, and it worked, btw.
And as an aside, most businesses of any size are in the software development business, whether they want to be or not. (they just don't sell it.)
But in that case, I wouldn't care. I'm not so much concerned about F(f)ree software at work. I'm concerned with access/maintainability.
Btw, kudos to your organization for taking such a reasonable stand.
MS is on the job
"We'll have access to the source code, and be able to update the app as needed due to new requirements or OS upgrade."
Worked for me.
Key words from the (invalid, but that's another thread) EULA:
"To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law"
So, even microsoft acknowledges that it can't completely hand-wave away the warranties the grandparent poster referenced.
virtual valarie
Unless Q ran into subspace interference while taunting Picard on the holodeck and got sucked into a temporal wormhole created by the borg.
I'm scared. PLEASE tell me you're not a screenwriter.