Here in Canada we get the Smart for two as our buying power is less then the US (as well as fuel as more expensive), and small cars are a lot more popular here than the US.
Here's a couple of reviews :
http://www.mcuniverse.com/The_Smart_Car_Comes_to_C anada.1325.0.html
Turns out the ZAP thing is important as not only will SMART only be introduced to the US in 2006, which is a way off yet; the US isn't going to get the forTwo. SMART figures, you big car drivin' folk won't want a forTwo and they are going to release a SUV instead.
You know it'd be great if these kind of vehicles would take off in the US. The US heavily influences transportation choices, and those chooses, in North America. If the US driving market changed it's attitude to a more European taste, we could make some serious moves forward with transport options with regard to fuel consumption. Fuel consumption doesn't seem to be taken very seriously in the US as fuel is cheaper in the US than Canada. Therefore in places like Canada, where fuel isn't that cheap, we get screwed, as the car options are dictated by the US market. If the market in the US changed to a more fuel conscious one I'd have more beer money.
Here's a good article on the details for the US.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5217861/
Some other links you may want to read:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/mediaroom/releases/nat/2004/04 -h077e.htm
http://www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety/atvpgm/menu.htm
Re:Boo F*cking Hoo. Get out of my industry.
on
NYT on EA Games
·
· Score: 1
Brooks comment can more than likely be applied to any industry. But that is irrelevant. I think there is a lot of reasons why productivity is the way it is. Good for you that you've found something that your good at. The other 90% of us are wondering what went wrong. Would you care to write the software for the big microwave all of you 10%'s are going to use to get rid of the rest of us? The people at EA are just that, people. They shouldn't be treated that way even if they are just the useless 90%
How true. I get the impression that this is pretty prevalent in IT. All you need is a tight set of spec, and some good senior programmers to run the galley, and 'cool' perks. It is possible to run a sweat shop. There is no cost involved other than your novice employees time. Which they, for some reason, don't seem to realize is being abused. In the mean time the companies are selling products and not paying what they would with more aware employees. Most of the time these novices think it's good bragging rights that they sleep under their desks becaues they seem to equate this to some new 'adventure'. Too much X sports maybe:) Eventually, they mature enough to realize that no matter how plush the carpet is, the reality is very different from the illusion they bought into, hook line and sinker.
Welcome to the new 'factory'. I've heard some people joke about putting together a programmers union. Sometimes I wonder if it won't happen.
I've read the threads, but here is some info that is close to home for me. http://www.torontohydro.com/energyservices/green_p ower/project_details/wind_turbine_project/wind_tur bine_videos.cfm
250 houses for the year?? Is this realistic? If it is what the hell is everybody waiting for? This single unit would offset the demand on the grid from my entire neighbourhood. 250 houses is a LOT of houses for just one wind turbine. Like I said if the numbers are realistic, why aren't we hooking these things up with our existing grid? Can't we just set them up to supplement the existing infrastructure?
Specs from site:
12. Generating Green Energy for the First Time (3.9 MB) (2.2 KB)
The turbine is the first machine of its kind to be installed in a downtown urban setting in North America.
Each year, the turbine will produce an average of 1,400 megawatt hours of power, equivalent to the electricity needed for about 250 homes.
The wind turbine will displace approximately 381 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), 6,400 kilograms of sulphur dioxide (SO2) and 1,900 kilograms of nitrous oxide (NOX) - the main ingredients in smog and acid rain.
I stated my point based solely on this:
Ignition interlocks require a breath test, which takes 30 seconds to complete, to start the car as well as random 'rolling retests' to discourage others from taking the test for you. These rolling retests require the driver to take the test as the car is moving.
Do you really think this is reasonable? The number of people that don't drink and drive outnumber the number of people that do. I am not suggesting that something not be done, but the solution needs to be targeted at the 'drinkers' not the 'drivers'. It would make more sense to do something at, say, the 'bar'(E.g. You want a drink? Hand over your keys. The establishment keeps them until you can prove, by some means, that you are compent to drive). Basically, you need to get majority support to make any changes, and the majority of people are not going to go for the proposed solution.
Your supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. This is working on the premise that everyone that drives is occasionaly drunk while doing it. I'm pretty sure that isn't the way the law is intended to be used. If New Mexico has a drinking and driving problem how about looking at why these people are drinking? How does throwing them in jail, more fines and all help? By the time you catch them they might have already hurt someone. You need to PREVENT not PROSECUTE.
The reviewer is right. For most people most of the time you need a reason to learn. Necessity is the mother of all invention, remember? In general people like to see instant useable results. I think you have two groups, and therefore, two basic streams that should be followed. The first is the amateur/hobbyist and the second the professionals (people that develop software for a living). The former probably need just a language that is simple to do moderately complicated tasks, something like VB 5/6 for example. The latter need considerably more, OOP, UML, etc.
Therefore the requirements for a intro language are radically different.
If you are somewhere inbetween learn Python...
This is a very broad topic, and I am going to assume that you use Windows. Maybe someone else has posted something useful if you use another OS. I personally use an old prosigina pII with piggy back 7 drive 9.1 GB SCSI RAID 5. This cost me about $200, as they thought the system was dead. It wouldn't boot (black screen with a single beep), I looked up the error codes and all it needed was a new CPU;). I also use the Windows back up utility on a scheduled job to back up a folder that is the root for everything that changes on a regular basis, and that I'd commit suicide if I'd lost. I also burn the same folder once a month to make sure. I do development works at home so I have multiple reasons to have this kind of setup. My SQL server runs on it too.
I'd follow these guidelines:
1) What do you want to back up?
2) How much do you want to back up?
3) How much do you want to spend?
4) Can you leverage what you have now?
In a lot of cases it is just a matter of altering 'how' you do things.
To answer all of the above, especially if money is an issue is too check out Ebay (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ite m=3055247111&category=51218), or local newsgroups, and see what is for sale. You'd be surprised at what is for sale that still has a lot of lovin' left for a home. These systems may be crap for an Enterprise environment, but are great for the home.
If you are just concerned about losing your documents, the cheapest way to go is to just use the Windows back up, with mirroring RAID if you have a MOBO that supports it. All you'll need is a new HDD to match the existing one, as well as a cheap burner for offline back ups. If you don't have RAID capabilites still use Windows Back Up, still get a cheap burner and discipline yourself to do back ups of the 'back up' once a week.
Hope this helps!
Well to be fair I don't think you can account for every single variable. As for the teachers knowing the difference, well, I don't know if that is a bad thing. Maybe they will see it for what it is, a means, like you said. I've had pretty good experiences with my teachers so I have (some) faith. I think that the role of education and how it is applied in todays environment needs to be re-evaluated.
Here here! You have my support. I couldn't care less what computers my kids use as long as they benefit from the experience. I imagine that the because of the nature of/. that you aren't going to get a very balanced opinion of for this topic.
What happens to the kids that won't get access just because someone makes some sort of arbitray ethical decision? The world is full of huge contradictions and paradoxes. If this gives these kids the chance to use computers and be comfortable with technology, why don't we trust the rest of the school system to teach them to think and make their own choices as they grow. The experience is more important then the who or what.
Right on dude. I agree. But...I think that is only represents the people that are interviewing you, not necessarily the people that you might work for.
Also, spot on with you interviewing them
Let me restate my actual point. There is no chance of anyone (short of people that don't need the money) trying to honestly answer those questions. Most people will either have canned answers for those questions, or will give you what they think you want to hear. Not mention that most people don't even talk to their loved ones about their 'weaknesses', work related or otherwise. You can't expect people to walk into an interview and treat it like confession. I can't even count how many people, and this includes HR staff, and training that I have received that flat out have told me how to deal with those questions. The advice in a nutshell? 'Never say anything bad about yourself. People will be people.' This would seem to be backed up by the article. Now lets say that you are interviewing. The 'perfectionist' tells you the truth. Then the next guy answers with a weakness you prefer. You hire him. What if he is the
'forked tongue devil'? Great, you've hired a liar. This situation happens all the time. What are you going to do? Tell him he was naughty for misleading you?
As for fitting in with corporate culture...sigh. Have you liked everyone that you have worked with? The team that needs the help should ALWAYS be part of the hiring process, but rarely ever is. Why is there friction between technical staff and management? Different philosophy that's why. HR has the same problem. The expression 'Like to like' applies well here. They hire people THEY like, not necessarily because of any fit. You've heard of the 'friends and family program haven't you? This means that you could lose the best candidate just because HR screens him based on a meaningless question or by the colour of his teeth.
If it's made by man it can be conquered by man. HR has been invalidated by its own existance. Their is an entire industry out there setup to defeat every aspect of these questions, with one objective; to get you a job.
If that article points out one thing it is that the whole HR industry has no idea what they need to do in order to identify good candidates.
So why keep them, or their philosophy? I have worked for many companies that didn't have HR (they were small to medium sized) and they ran great. Nice people, good environments. The bigger companies have HR departments and I found that they were no better or worse than the small/medium companies I have worked for. One of the best places I worked (medium sized) didn't bother with any of those questions or techniques. They narrowed the field to those with a good combination of skill, experience, and then took them to lunch. Yes, lunch or bought them a coffee, candidates choice. The manager looking for help, and one tech guy, would simply see what this person was all about.
If they got a good vibe and the person seemed to be genuine; they were hired.
This, in a way, is quite subjective, but everywhere I have been that uses a method like that, has been a great place to work.
HR just hasn't delivered on what is been promising for years. It is time to accept the fact that their is no cookie cutter way to hire people. You need to feel them out yourself and take a chance.
"As far as how the applicant answers, I can see definite downsides to "I'm a perfectionist" (meaning: I never finish projects because I'm always working on "just one last issue") or "I work too hard" (meaning: I'm a martyr and will likely have a serious case of burn-out several months down the road, not to mention upsetting the work apple-cart)."
Geez...and what if the 'perfectionist' also knows how to stick to the specs, 'I work too hard', is actually factoring in his family life as well, or maybe he really knows when it's crunch time?
'Do you eat lunch?' Give me a break...What are you going to if the guy answers 'No, I use that time to watch pretty women go by on the patio'.
How about I judge you right now for posting what you did? I think you are a prime candidate for a Jeopardy host yourself.
I keep wondering when people will stop debating the merit of the interview questions and start looking at why none of the techniques work any better than picking candidates from a line up...
Slashdot Mirror
Here's a couple of reviews : http://www.mcuniverse.com/The_Smart_Car_Comes_to_C anada.1325.0.html
http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/pw/05smartc abriolet.htm
Turns out the ZAP thing is important as not only will SMART only be introduced to the US in 2006, which is a way off yet; the US isn't going to get the forTwo. SMART figures, you big car drivin' folk won't want a forTwo and they are going to release a SUV instead.
You know it'd be great if these kind of vehicles would take off in the US. The US heavily influences transportation choices, and those chooses, in North America. If the US driving market changed it's attitude to a more European taste, we could make some serious moves forward with transport options with regard to fuel consumption. Fuel consumption doesn't seem to be taken very seriously in the US as fuel is cheaper in the US than Canada. Therefore in places like Canada, where fuel isn't that cheap, we get screwed, as the car options are dictated by the US market. If the market in the US changed to a more fuel conscious one I'd have more beer money.
Here's a good article on the details for the US.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5217861/
Some other links you may want to read:4 -h077e.htm
http://www.tc.gc.ca/mediaroom/releases/nat/2004/0
http://www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety/atvpgm/menu.htm
Brooks comment can more than likely be applied to any industry. But that is irrelevant. I think there is a lot of reasons why productivity is the way it is. Good for you that you've found something that your good at. The other 90% of us are wondering what went wrong. Would you care to write the software for the big microwave all of you 10%'s are going to use to get rid of the rest of us? The people at EA are just that, people. They shouldn't be treated that way even if they are just the useless 90%
How true. I get the impression that this is pretty prevalent in IT. All you need is a tight set of spec, and some good senior programmers to run the galley, and 'cool' perks. It is possible to run a sweat shop. There is no cost involved other than your novice employees time. Which they, for some reason, don't seem to realize is being abused. In the mean time the companies are selling products and not paying what they would with more aware employees. Most of the time these novices think it's good bragging rights that they sleep under their desks becaues they seem to equate this to some new 'adventure'. Too much X sports maybe :) Eventually, they mature enough to realize that no matter how plush the carpet is, the reality is very different from the illusion they bought into, hook line and sinker.
Welcome to the new 'factory'. I've heard some people joke about putting together a programmers union. Sometimes I wonder if it won't happen.
250 houses for the year?? Is this realistic? If it is what the hell is everybody waiting for? This single unit would offset the demand on the grid from my entire neighbourhood. 250 houses is a LOT of houses for just one wind turbine. Like I said if the numbers are realistic, why aren't we hooking these things up with our existing grid? Can't we just set them up to supplement the existing infrastructure?
Specs from site:
I stated my point based solely on this: Ignition interlocks require a breath test, which takes 30 seconds to complete, to start the car as well as random 'rolling retests' to discourage others from taking the test for you. These rolling retests require the driver to take the test as the car is moving. Do you really think this is reasonable? The number of people that don't drink and drive outnumber the number of people that do. I am not suggesting that something not be done, but the solution needs to be targeted at the 'drinkers' not the 'drivers'. It would make more sense to do something at, say, the 'bar'(E.g. You want a drink? Hand over your keys. The establishment keeps them until you can prove, by some means, that you are compent to drive). Basically, you need to get majority support to make any changes, and the majority of people are not going to go for the proposed solution.
Your supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. This is working on the premise that everyone that drives is occasionaly drunk while doing it. I'm pretty sure that isn't the way the law is intended to be used. If New Mexico has a drinking and driving problem how about looking at why these people are drinking? How does throwing them in jail, more fines and all help? By the time you catch them they might have already hurt someone. You need to PREVENT not PROSECUTE.
The reviewer is right. For most people most of the time you need a reason to learn. Necessity is the mother of all invention, remember? In general people like to see instant useable results. I think you have two groups, and therefore, two basic streams that should be followed. The first is the amateur/hobbyist and the second the professionals (people that develop software for a living). The former probably need just a language that is simple to do moderately complicated tasks, something like VB 5/6 for example. The latter need considerably more, OOP, UML, etc. Therefore the requirements for a intro language are radically different. If you are somewhere inbetween learn Python...
This is a very broad topic, and I am going to assume that you use Windows. Maybe someone else has posted something useful if you use another OS. I personally use an old prosigina pII with piggy back 7 drive 9.1 GB SCSI RAID 5. This cost me about $200, as they thought the system was dead. It wouldn't boot (black screen with a single beep), I looked up the error codes and all it needed was a new CPU ;). I also use the Windows back up utility on a scheduled job to back up a folder that is the root for everything that changes on a regular basis, and that I'd commit suicide if I'd lost. I also burn the same folder once a month to make sure. I do development works at home so I have multiple reasons to have this kind of setup. My SQL server runs on it too.
e m=3055247111&category=51218), or local newsgroups, and see what is for sale. You'd be surprised at what is for sale that still has a lot of lovin' left for a home. These systems may be crap for an Enterprise environment, but are great for the home.
If you are just concerned about losing your documents, the cheapest way to go is to just use the Windows back up, with mirroring RAID if you have a MOBO that supports it. All you'll need is a new HDD to match the existing one, as well as a cheap burner for offline back ups. If you don't have RAID capabilites still use Windows Back Up, still get a cheap burner and discipline yourself to do back ups of the 'back up' once a week.
Hope this helps!
I'd follow these guidelines:
1) What do you want to back up?
2) How much do you want to back up?
3) How much do you want to spend?
4) Can you leverage what you have now?
In a lot of cases it is just a matter of altering 'how' you do things. To answer all of the above, especially if money is an issue is too check out Ebay (http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&it
Well to be fair I don't think you can account for every single variable. As for the teachers knowing the difference, well, I don't know if that is a bad thing. Maybe they will see it for what it is, a means, like you said. I've had pretty good experiences with my teachers so I have (some) faith. I think that the role of education and how it is applied in todays environment needs to be re-evaluated.
Here here! You have my support. I couldn't care less what computers my kids use as long as they benefit from the experience. I imagine that the because of the nature of /. that you aren't going to get a very balanced opinion of for this topic.
What happens to the kids that won't get access just because someone makes some sort of arbitray ethical decision? The world is full of huge contradictions and paradoxes. If this gives these kids the chance to use computers and be comfortable with technology, why don't we trust the rest of the school system to teach them to think and make their own choices as they grow. The experience is more important then the who or what.
Um, how come everybody that seems to support HR on this thread is posting as 'Anonymous Coward'?
Right on dude. I agree. But...I think that is only represents the people that are interviewing you, not necessarily the people that you might work for. Also, spot on with you interviewing them
Let me restate my actual point. There is no chance of anyone (short of people that don't need the money) trying to honestly answer those questions. Most people will either have canned answers for those questions, or will give you what they think you want to hear. Not mention that most people don't even talk to their loved ones about their 'weaknesses', work related or otherwise. You can't expect people to walk into an interview and treat it like confession. I can't even count how many people, and this includes HR staff, and training that I have received that flat out have told me how to deal with those questions. The advice in a nutshell? 'Never say anything bad about yourself. People will be people.' This would seem to be backed up by the article. Now lets say that you are interviewing. The 'perfectionist' tells you the truth. Then the next guy answers with a weakness you prefer. You hire him. What if he is the 'forked tongue devil'? Great, you've hired a liar. This situation happens all the time. What are you going to do? Tell him he was naughty for misleading you? As for fitting in with corporate culture...sigh. Have you liked everyone that you have worked with? The team that needs the help should ALWAYS be part of the hiring process, but rarely ever is. Why is there friction between technical staff and management? Different philosophy that's why. HR has the same problem. The expression 'Like to like' applies well here. They hire people THEY like, not necessarily because of any fit. You've heard of the 'friends and family program haven't you? This means that you could lose the best candidate just because HR screens him based on a meaningless question or by the colour of his teeth. If it's made by man it can be conquered by man. HR has been invalidated by its own existance. Their is an entire industry out there setup to defeat every aspect of these questions, with one objective; to get you a job. If that article points out one thing it is that the whole HR industry has no idea what they need to do in order to identify good candidates. So why keep them, or their philosophy? I have worked for many companies that didn't have HR (they were small to medium sized) and they ran great. Nice people, good environments. The bigger companies have HR departments and I found that they were no better or worse than the small/medium companies I have worked for. One of the best places I worked (medium sized) didn't bother with any of those questions or techniques. They narrowed the field to those with a good combination of skill, experience, and then took them to lunch. Yes, lunch or bought them a coffee, candidates choice. The manager looking for help, and one tech guy, would simply see what this person was all about. If they got a good vibe and the person seemed to be genuine; they were hired. This, in a way, is quite subjective, but everywhere I have been that uses a method like that, has been a great place to work. HR just hasn't delivered on what is been promising for years. It is time to accept the fact that their is no cookie cutter way to hire people. You need to feel them out yourself and take a chance.
"As far as how the applicant answers, I can see definite downsides to "I'm a perfectionist" (meaning: I never finish projects because I'm always working on "just one last issue") or "I work too hard" (meaning: I'm a martyr and will likely have a serious case of burn-out several months down the road, not to mention upsetting the work apple-cart)." Geez...and what if the 'perfectionist' also knows how to stick to the specs, 'I work too hard', is actually factoring in his family life as well, or maybe he really knows when it's crunch time? 'Do you eat lunch?' Give me a break...What are you going to if the guy answers 'No, I use that time to watch pretty women go by on the patio'. How about I judge you right now for posting what you did? I think you are a prime candidate for a Jeopardy host yourself. I keep wondering when people will stop debating the merit of the interview questions and start looking at why none of the techniques work any better than picking candidates from a line up...
LAN BITCH - Lots of Aspirin Normally Basically I'm Totally and Completely Helpless