Sure, it could be a poor search or interview, but have you ever considered bad interviewers?
I've encountered more than one interviewer who seem to believe that the best way to identify a candidate as being "good" is to give them a test from a second semester programming course and see if they remember the definition of something. It begs a question: Do you really want a programmer who is completely reliant on memorized information? I knew a guy in my courses who could give you the textbook definition of OO to the letter; problem is, he couldn't actually IMPLEMENT it to save his life.
This is spot on correct. Everyone wants the experienced developer, but few are willing to punt the money to train said developer in development operations.
One wonders if the future of development is going to rely on students doing their own small projects for a few years out of college before any company will touch them (in other words, will 90% of graduates need to form startups just to get experience that larger, more experienced companies look for?)
So there are polling locations that require NO form of identification (be it a registration card that has been certified and sent by the state, not application materials)? If so, I'm frightened by that more than people widely distributing applications to pets.
Says the obvious democrat. But seriously, I think you're wrong.
Or, in other words, you're showing your own bias by your attack. If he's wrong, point it out, but the fact that he's crying "bias" just implies that he's of the opinion that they're biased, not that he feels insecure.
You're shallow attempts to pidgeonhole me (which miss the mark, btw) only prove my point. I'm not attacking the author for HIS bias; I'm pointing out that we now consider it acceptable to slam someone else for bias without even taking a realistic look at their ideas first.
You'll notice that I don't deny that Krugman has an agenda, for obvious reasons: HE DOES! But if that's the first and only thing you have to say regarding him winning the award, then you have nothing useful to contribute. That's a sad indicator of where we are going in civil discourse. People need to spend less time being told who stand on which side and more time analyzing different stances on subject matter...well, presuming we want to actually advance ourselves sooner than later.
Honestly, as long as you voice an opinion in some editorial form that serves more than a handful of national papers, you are inevitably tied to an agenda by someone else even if you don't claim one (that's not to say Krugman hides his agenda).
My point, of course, is that whining about agenda is a symptom of feeling the need crying bias about other people's ideas/opinions. Apparently we, intelligent beings, have come so far that we'd rather just bitch about bias than have a worthwhile discourse.
In summary, stop crying about political agenda; the longer we waste on it, the faster we continue to ignore the real problems that need serious critical thinking.
DISD is the perfect example of how NOT to run a school district. Anyone commenting on this story should followup by seeing how poorly DISD manages to function. This overall story doesn't hold a candle to Dallas' "educational" problems.
I can't help but be amused that the mainstream media is getting its first real taste of/b/tards. Welcome to the Internet that you've ignore over the past decade of your "discovery of the Web", reporters/op-ed writers!
They don't need to care, especially since this is nothing more than an attention whore story to being with. This not the first nor the last college course that uses a secure, non-connected-to-the-outside-world setup to allow students to practice illegal activities to learn better IT security. In fact, this is a poor example of security training; the good ones aren't focusing on trying to annoy vendors, they are focusing on learning what attackers do in order to better learn how to defend a system.
Cocky is more like it. He thinks he's got superior intellect that will allow him to abuse the "loopholes" and get out of any jam he encounters. Arrogant people like this are the reason for the word hubris.
In other words, he doesn't mind releasing his name because he thinks he's got the game to back up his mouth.
ME had no chance as it was. Everyone already knew XP was the future (Whistler has plenty of coverage at the time) and no one (except people buying new systems) wanted to waste their money on something that would be archaic soon.
I tend to think the reason for your observations is that geeks are used to this life. We've been surfing the web since before most people had a good reason to own a personal computer; we're not over impressed with our ability to send an IM to a buddy while sitting in a dark movie theater.
From my experience, a lot of the people who spend more time sending text messages or hanging out on social networks are people that were perfectly social before it was all taken online. With the addition tech out there, they think that they are expanding on their social capabilities. Problem is, they are really NOT doing that and, in some cases, they are being more anti-social.
This is going to come full circle some day. Eventually people are going to realize that all the great tech they've relied on to do this cool crap was actually only stymieing their social lives. I mean, really, if you are sending 50 text messages to someone, you either fail to grasp that there is an easier way (talk to the person) or you are doing it at a time when you shouldn't be anyway (in which case you'll eventually be punished). I await the days when a cell phone becomes a phone again rather than a device for doing everything except communicating when necessary.
You don't see how because they don't have any claim other than their meaningless words. They're being under priced, they know their being under priced, and they simply have no desire to cater to demand that sales be cheaper. Taking it out on the customer is just the cherry on top.
I'd say an additional point is that compilations of music are more vogue than ever. It almost seems like radio focuses on 20-30 songs for a 3 month stretch of time so that it can be packaged and sold in stores while the next set of new tracks invade the airwaves.
One more comment while I'm at it: About a decade ago, we started seeing a noticeable increase in tv shows (most of them aimed at teenage audiences) adopting songs/bands as if they were releasing music to the public; the result was a proliferation of interest in these groups based on one song. It is worth wondering whether or not people grew to love that specific song for its link to the shows itself, and likewise a bare minimum of interest paid to other songs by that artist due to lack of significance to the shows they watched.
I mean, really, how many bands have achieved significant longevity after being introduced to the public in such a fashion?
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, it could be a poor search or interview, but have you ever considered bad interviewers?
I've encountered more than one interviewer who seem to believe that the best way to identify a candidate as being "good" is to give them a test from a second semester programming course and see if they remember the definition of something. It begs a question: Do you really want a programmer who is completely reliant on memorized information? I knew a guy in my courses who could give you the textbook definition of OO to the letter; problem is, he couldn't actually IMPLEMENT it to save his life.
This is spot on correct. Everyone wants the experienced developer, but few are willing to punt the money to train said developer in development operations.
One wonders if the future of development is going to rely on students doing their own small projects for a few years out of college before any company will touch them (in other words, will 90% of graduates need to form startups just to get experience that larger, more experienced companies look for?)
When griefing gets boring in online games, take it to the next best place: Ebay!
Take your 7 number UIDs and get off my lawn :p
(/patiently waits for someone with a lower UID to give me the business)
Not quite. I live in one of those states where the outcome is predetermined.
Heard a guy answer "plastic" when asked whether or not he wanted to vote electronically or with a paper ballot.
The woman had no clue what he was going for. I nearly lost hope right then and there, and I hadn't even got to the voting booth yet...
So there are polling locations that require NO form of identification (be it a registration card that has been certified and sent by the state, not application materials)? If so, I'm frightened by that more than people widely distributing applications to pets.
if election officials actually provided the pet with the ABILITY (aka some form of proof that is acceptable at a voting location) to vote.
Says the obvious democrat. But seriously, I think you're wrong.
Or, in other words, you're showing your own bias by your attack. If he's wrong, point it out, but the fact that he's crying "bias" just implies that he's of the opinion that they're biased, not that he feels insecure.
You're shallow attempts to pidgeonhole me (which miss the mark, btw) only prove my point. I'm not attacking the author for HIS bias; I'm pointing out that we now consider it acceptable to slam someone else for bias without even taking a realistic look at their ideas first.
You'll notice that I don't deny that Krugman has an agenda, for obvious reasons: HE DOES! But if that's the first and only thing you have to say regarding him winning the award, then you have nothing useful to contribute. That's a sad indicator of where we are going in civil discourse. People need to spend less time being told who stand on which side and more time analyzing different stances on subject matter...well, presuming we want to actually advance ourselves sooner than later.
Honestly, as long as you voice an opinion in some editorial form that serves more than a handful of national papers, you are inevitably tied to an agenda by someone else even if you don't claim one (that's not to say Krugman hides his agenda).
My point, of course, is that whining about agenda is a symptom of feeling the need crying bias about other people's ideas/opinions. Apparently we, intelligent beings, have come so far that we'd rather just bitch about bias than have a worthwhile discourse.
In summary, stop crying about political agenda; the longer we waste on it, the faster we continue to ignore the real problems that need serious critical thinking.
mmm...Potatoe...
DISD is the perfect example of how NOT to run a school district. Anyone commenting on this story should followup by seeing how poorly DISD manages to function. This overall story doesn't hold a candle to Dallas' "educational" problems.
I can't help but be amused that the mainstream media is getting its first real taste of /b/tards. Welcome to the Internet that you've ignore over the past decade of your "discovery of the Web", reporters/op-ed writers!
With the hurricane coming to town, their facility seems like a fairly safe space compared to the vacation spots on the beaches in South Texas.
The kind that have more disposable income than brains.
Remove the tag...
Indeed, terrorists are going to start training themselves to walk without rhythm :O
Have you met many recent graduates? I'd say "eduction" sits right up there with the current requirements for a Bachelors :(.
Face it, Masters is the new Bachelors and Bachelors is the new High School diploma.
First thought that came to my mind. Should've been linked in the story description!
Gov't apathy?
They don't need to care, especially since this is nothing more than an attention whore story to being with. This not the first nor the last college course that uses a secure, non-connected-to-the-outside-world setup to allow students to practice illegal activities to learn better IT security. In fact, this is a poor example of security training; the good ones aren't focusing on trying to annoy vendors, they are focusing on learning what attackers do in order to better learn how to defend a system.
Cocky is more like it. He thinks he's got superior intellect that will allow him to abuse the "loopholes" and get out of any jam he encounters. Arrogant people like this are the reason for the word hubris.
In other words, he doesn't mind releasing his name because he thinks he's got the game to back up his mouth.
ME had no chance as it was. Everyone already knew XP was the future (Whistler has plenty of coverage at the time) and no one (except people buying new systems) wanted to waste their money on something that would be archaic soon.
I tend to think the reason for your observations is that geeks are used to this life. We've been surfing the web since before most people had a good reason to own a personal computer; we're not over impressed with our ability to send an IM to a buddy while sitting in a dark movie theater.
From my experience, a lot of the people who spend more time sending text messages or hanging out on social networks are people that were perfectly social before it was all taken online. With the addition tech out there, they think that they are expanding on their social capabilities. Problem is, they are really NOT doing that and, in some cases, they are being more anti-social.
This is going to come full circle some day. Eventually people are going to realize that all the great tech they've relied on to do this cool crap was actually only stymieing their social lives. I mean, really, if you are sending 50 text messages to someone, you either fail to grasp that there is an easier way (talk to the person) or you are doing it at a time when you shouldn't be anyway (in which case you'll eventually be punished). I await the days when a cell phone becomes a phone again rather than a device for doing everything except communicating when necessary.
You don't see how because they don't have any claim other than their meaningless words. They're being under priced, they know their being under priced, and they simply have no desire to cater to demand that sales be cheaper. Taking it out on the customer is just the cherry on top.
I'd say an additional point is that compilations of music are more vogue than ever. It almost seems like radio focuses on 20-30 songs for a 3 month stretch of time so that it can be packaged and sold in stores while the next set of new tracks invade the airwaves.
One more comment while I'm at it: About a decade ago, we started seeing a noticeable increase in tv shows (most of them aimed at teenage audiences) adopting songs/bands as if they were releasing music to the public; the result was a proliferation of interest in these groups based on one song. It is worth wondering whether or not people grew to love that specific song for its link to the shows itself, and likewise a bare minimum of interest paid to other songs by that artist due to lack of significance to the shows they watched.
I mean, really, how many bands have achieved significant longevity after being introduced to the public in such a fashion?