It sounds like they need more than one project manager and a number of additional worker-bees to get the jobs done.
There are three responses that might generate:
* "you'll just have to work harder" This response is not unusual but tells you you're going to fail anyway and is a signal to get out of the organization before it crashes and burns.
* they'll cancel some projects and focus their people on the remaining ones
* they'll hire some more warm bodies to get more work done.
My recent favorite response: "I reject your linear thinking. You are much smarter than I about how to find technical solutions"
Although it's clear I'm not smarter than him as I hadn't considered leveraging non-linear causality to complete technology projects on-time
I thought it was wacky before I understood where he is going.
Essentially he wants to push responsibilities down to the state level, making the individual states essentially compete with each other. Right now, if you don't like how the Dpt. Education does things well tough luck. You'd have to immigrate to Canada which is typically impractical. So there's no incentive to fix things really, because the US Govt has a captive consumer. Having the individual states compete, there suddenly becomes motivation to improve.
Sounds like a plan, but I still don't feel it applies to the scientific research agencies. I don't see how you can have those as anything but a collective resource.
I thought it was still up in the air. Isn't the distraction being on a call?
It's pretty clear to me that the danger comes from divided attention and the level of concentration required to interact in a remote conversation with terrible signal to noise.
If the danger arose from holding the phone to your ear then we should also outlaw scratching your ear and adjusting your glasses. The current law is safety theater.
Odd, I get crisper pictures with smaller apertures, all else being equal, and I'm pretty sure everybody else in the world does, too. You've got it completely backwards there.
Most lenses reach ideal sharpness around F8, so you are both right.
Smaller apertures and you run into diffraction limitations. Larger apertures and you run into narrow depth of field issues, as well as design issues. I believe it is difficult to accurately manufacture the lens to align at large apertures.
I notice in myself that music can distract or enhance concentration depending on music style.
I've concluded that music with vocals is very distracting. I believe there is contention for the language part of my brain which is simultaneously trying to decode the lyrics and decode the words on the computer screen.
On the other hand, if the music is entirely instrumental, then there is no such issue and I can have full concentration.
Next person that tells you "a corporation is like a person", ask them how many businesses they've incorporated. If it's zero, you're perfectly within your rights to kick them in the knee.
Better yet, get your corporation to kick them in the knee so you are protected.
The Canadian government essentially permits this, for example, if you drive across the border with a truck full of DVDs, the Canadian customs agents can't stop you
Not their job to check who leaves the country. That's part of the freedom thing. I could exit the country with a case of pirate DVDs, 500 pounds of crack, a rocket launcher and a dead hooker in the trunk and they wouldn't even check me. And if the US authorities spotted me, I'd toss the DVDs out the window first.
OK traditional bulbs use around 40 extra watts over CFLs. Where do the extra watts end up, heat right? So I live in an area where I have to heat my house 9 months of the year. So the the way I see it, the old style bulbs help heat my house, and I just consume less energy from my heating appliance. Isn't this a wash energy wise? Am I really saving anything system wide with CFLs?
Most of the noise from an SLR comes from the big mirror flapping up and down. Leicas are rangefinders, they don't have a mirror. Also, the more recent Canon's have a stealth mode whereby it pre-raises the mirror. You then approach your target, release the shutter, then walk away before lowering the mirror. The actual shutter is very quiet and can't be heard with any amount of background noise.
Well you either go nuclear, which could possibly leak crap and possibly even kill someone maybe once a decade, or go with coal, which is guaranteed to leak crap everywhere and kill people every day.
Coal just kills slowly, so somehow people don't care about it.
none of the roofs are rated to carry that. All the planted crops, except trees, are killed. All trees less than a few meters die, naturally. You can't plow it. Most plants won't grow in it. Cars won't run for very long when it's in the air and nobody's digging a car out of a few meters of ash without patience, and if you did there's no where to drive it where you won't get bogged down in soft crunchy ash. The ash is suffused with toxic gases, some of which precipitate as acids. When it rains it kills all the life in all the rivers, and the silt changes the course of major rivers and minor streams. When it gets to the Atlantic and the Gulf it kills almost all of the fish in the ocean. It interferes with cell phone reception, TV and radio. A few meters of ash is enough to clog every hydro power plant, every nuclear power plant in the country. It blocks all the railways and all the highways of course, and that's how we move food around. And if you're not directly affected but you don't like America, that would be a fine day to attack.
Shit, will it really affect my cell phone reception?
There's a lot of problems with your first argument. IP is a legal concept that was created by statute, therefore it exists. The idea that law can only be applied when physical objects are involved is unsupported.
I don't care for current IP law either, but it doesn't go away because you pretend it doesn't exist. Please don't discredit the plentiful legitimate arguments for our case by coming up with nonsensical ones.
You have to love how the left bloggers love to cry fowl at every little turn. Yet, when they attempt to rig search engine results it's somehow okay. All leftist bloggers cry fowl at dirty tricks and also rig search engines? Or maybe political parties are not monolithic collective consciousnesses.
This actually seems like a modern, cost effective and fair distribution model to me. Out of curiosity, what about it doesn't meet that criteria?
Among other problems, with this solution, the record companies would no longer have to produce any music at all. I mean what incentive would they have? Just release maybe 2 albums a year of your kid plucking a banjo, collect your taxes, and pocket the 5 billion or whatever.
And like I said, nobody programmed their programs to split the processing into three parts, only 1, 2, or 4
I wrote several programs that spawn X threads, where I could configure X to any integer upon program launch. I've had X at 3 several times and the thing didn't self destruct.
Slashdot Mirror
It sounds like they need more than one project manager and a number of additional worker-bees to get the jobs done.
There are three responses that might generate:
* "you'll just have to work harder" This response is not unusual but tells you you're going to fail anyway and is a signal to get out of the organization before it crashes and burns.
* they'll cancel some projects and focus their people on the remaining ones
* they'll hire some more warm bodies to get more work done.
My recent favorite response: "I reject your linear thinking. You are much smarter than I about how to find technical solutions"
Although it's clear I'm not smarter than him as I hadn't considered leveraging non-linear causality to complete technology projects on-time
I thought it was wacky before I understood where he is going.
Essentially he wants to push responsibilities down to the state level, making the individual states essentially compete with each other. Right now, if you don't like how the Dpt. Education does things well tough luck. You'd have to immigrate to Canada which is typically impractical. So there's no incentive to fix things really, because the US Govt has a captive consumer. Having the individual states compete, there suddenly becomes motivation to improve.
Sounds like a plan, but I still don't feel it applies to the scientific research agencies. I don't see how you can have those as anything but a collective resource.
Ontario and Quebec is actually called Eastern Canada. Those 3 provinces west of Ontario are central. While British Columbia is West.
Central Canada.
Depends who you ask. Easterners use the definition which suits their political inclinations. Everyone else says "look at a map jackasses".
I thought it was still up in the air. Isn't the distraction being on a call?
It's pretty clear to me that the danger comes from divided attention and the level of concentration required to interact in a remote conversation with terrible signal to noise.
If the danger arose from holding the phone to your ear then we should also outlaw scratching your ear and adjusting your glasses. The current law is safety theater.
Odd, I get crisper pictures with smaller apertures, all else being equal, and I'm pretty sure everybody else in the world does, too. You've got it completely backwards there.
Most lenses reach ideal sharpness around F8, so you are both right.
Smaller apertures and you run into diffraction limitations. Larger apertures and you run into narrow depth of field issues, as well as design issues. I believe it is difficult to accurately manufacture the lens to align at large apertures.
I notice in myself that music can distract or enhance concentration depending on music style.
I've concluded that music with vocals is very distracting. I believe there is contention for the language part of my brain which is simultaneously trying to decode the lyrics and decode the words on the computer screen.
On the other hand, if the music is entirely instrumental, then there is no such issue and I can have full concentration.
The audiophiles I've talked to don't get turntables and tube amps for better accuracy. They just like the sound better.
Essentially the turntable and amp become part of the instrument. They do change the music, but in a desirable way.
In the crossing points I've been through, you are on US soil when questioned by US guards. So if they don't like something you can be detained.
I find it somewhat strange that US guards could operate on Canadian soil.
Next person that tells you "a corporation is like a person", ask them how many businesses they've incorporated. If it's zero, you're perfectly within your rights to kick them in the knee.
Better yet, get your corporation to kick them in the knee so you are protected.
The Canadian government essentially permits this, for example, if you drive across the border with a truck full of DVDs, the Canadian customs agents can't stop you
Not their job to check who leaves the country. That's part of the freedom thing. I could exit the country with a case of pirate DVDs, 500 pounds of crack, a rocket launcher and a dead hooker in the trunk and they wouldn't even check me. And if the US authorities spotted me, I'd toss the DVDs out the window first.
OK traditional bulbs use around 40 extra watts over CFLs. Where do the extra watts end up, heat right? So I live in an area where I have to heat my house 9 months of the year. So the the way I see it, the old style bulbs help heat my house, and I just consume less energy from my heating appliance. Isn't this a wash energy wise? Am I really saving anything system wide with CFLs?
An SLR sensor doesn't have to do 1, 2, 3, 4 and it can do 5 earlier in the process. 1 and 2 are handled by other devices.
Most of the noise from an SLR comes from the big mirror flapping up and down. Leicas are rangefinders, they don't have a mirror. Also, the more recent Canon's have a stealth mode whereby it pre-raises the mirror. You then approach your target, release the shutter, then walk away before lowering the mirror. The actual shutter is very quiet and can't be heard with any amount of background noise.
I'm ready to be a criminal.
I don't know exactly how far it is to Alpha Centauri, but I'm still gonna go ahead and make the call not to ride there on my bike.
Well you either go nuclear, which could possibly leak crap and possibly even kill someone maybe once a decade, or go with coal, which is guaranteed to leak crap everywhere and kill people every day.
Coal just kills slowly, so somehow people don't care about it.
none of the roofs are rated to carry that. All the planted crops, except trees, are killed. All trees less than a few meters die, naturally. You can't plow it. Most plants won't grow in it. Cars won't run for very long when it's in the air and nobody's digging a car out of a few meters of ash without patience, and if you did there's no where to drive it where you won't get bogged down in soft crunchy ash. The ash is suffused with toxic gases, some of which precipitate as acids. When it rains it kills all the life in all the rivers, and the silt changes the course of major rivers and minor streams. When it gets to the Atlantic and the Gulf it kills almost all of the fish in the ocean. It interferes with cell phone reception, TV and radio. A few meters of ash is enough to clog every hydro power plant, every nuclear power plant in the country. It blocks all the railways and all the highways of course, and that's how we move food around. And if you're not directly affected but you don't like America, that would be a fine day to attack.
Shit, will it really affect my cell phone reception?
first deca post!
There's a lot of problems with your first argument. IP is a legal concept that was created by statute, therefore it exists. The idea that law can only be applied when physical objects are involved is unsupported.
I don't care for current IP law either, but it doesn't go away because you pretend it doesn't exist. Please don't discredit the plentiful legitimate arguments for our case by coming up with nonsensical ones.
we would switch off maybe every 20 minutes or so. this way no one person gets tired and burned out from typing or error checking.
Bah. A real programmer should be able to go 12 hours easily for sufficiently large values of doritos and mountain dew.
Marketing needs to be involved. We will shoot them in the belly, rip out their guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks.
Head first was pretty good, but I still prefer my old standby - "Balls Deep Into C#"
This actually seems like a modern, cost effective and fair distribution model to me. Out of curiosity, what about it doesn't meet that criteria?
Among other problems, with this solution, the record companies would no longer have to produce any music at all. I mean what incentive would they have? Just release maybe 2 albums a year of your kid plucking a banjo, collect your taxes, and pocket the 5 billion or whatever.
And like I said, nobody programmed their programs to split the processing into three parts, only 1, 2, or 4
I wrote several programs that spawn X threads, where I could configure X to any integer upon program launch. I've had X at 3 several times and the thing didn't self destruct.
Well if you were the tech, and instructed to do something that promotes the Pirate Bay and the free spread of information, would you complain?