Saying that hiding the source for an Operating System from the general public robs them of learning is like saying keeping Quantum Physics textbooks away from six year olds robs them of learning.
No kidding. That's always been the least compeeling linux argument for me (and I say this as a user) - it is NOT possible for even a college trained programmer to go in and start playing with even a small OSS project. I'd say less than 100 Brazillians would be benefited from the "openness" angle of linux. It pretty much comes down to cost and an abstract principle that has no impact for them.
Dorks are nerds with friends. Real nerds don't have friends - they're antisocial.
I disagree. Real nerds - as I see them, anyway - are just people who like challenges and problems. They can be reasonably adjusted, and frequently will do nerdly things with other nerds. Can even do non-nerdly things with non-nerds.
Your classic dork hangs around the nerds, pretending to understand what they're takling about, and tries to steer the conversation towards something dorky. That's what's so sad - these people who see the nerd group as being the highest social level to which they can aspire.
But all these high-numbered posers, whining about how irrelevant or how hard it is to to understand this timeframe, are fake nerds. What is the word for that?
How about two: Doc Ruby.
Sorry, couldn't resist. But I know what you mean - the distinction I always made is that nerds are the people who like esoteria for the sake thereof; dorks are people who wish they were as smart as the nerds they hang around, being otherwise ostracized elsewhere. Dorks take up the more banal nerd pastimes, not being able to take up proper nerdly pursuits. Example: Nerds play with electronics, develop explosives, devise methods for factoring primes, etc. Not being able to do any of that, dorks fixate on Star Wars.
Saw it all the time in high school, college, etc. Nothing worse than a "Nerd groupie."
Just like the judge smacked down the frivolous SCO lawsuit?
Yep. Have you seen what the judge has said to them? IBM has carried virtually all the relevant motions, and the judge has made very pointed comments about SCO's lack of anything resembling evidence. That said, there are procedures that must be followed. I think the judge is fed up with SCO, but is making sure to avoid pulling a Jackson and getting overturned on appeal due to obvious bias.
Last week I just upgraded to kde 3.3 because i figured it has allthe buggs worked out. Oh well i wait a few months and get 3.4, only to have 3.5 come out a week later
You're just lucky you're not running Debian STABLE, I think they just got KDE-1.2.
The poster did not say it was not intellectual usage, he said it was not a word. Which would imply something on the order of "smeglefyer."
The distinction being what - that "irregardless" becomes a word simply because a number of people use it incorrectly? Irregardless of how many people use it that way, it's still incorrect. By your standard, any set of connected letters that someone incorrcetly uses in speech becomes a word. It's only in the dictionary because many people use it incorrectly.
You can split hairs all you want, you'll still sound ridiculous if you use it in speech.
It is a word. In fact this webster's entry remarks that people always say "It is not a word." When in fact it is.
You skipped the part about how it's a "word" created in America in the 20th century, from a blend of "irrespective" and "regardless." The "ir-" prefix and "-less" suffix are redundant. You also fail to mention that Webster's recommends it not be used. Dictionary.com is less kind, calling it a "blunder."
This is an example of a made up word that does not have a correct usage, but American dictionaries put it in because so many people make the mistake. Because it isn't correct usage, many people will make possibly unfounded assumptions about your intellect.
The one advantage of the iPod solution is there are probably times when you have your ipod with you, and a friend's pooter decides to toasty. You won't have a knoppix CD with you - and you probably won't have a flash drive, though some people do go pretty much everywhere with them. But your iPod? When I get one, I plan on having it surgically implanted. Thing's going everywhere.
P.S. I get laid plenty, my friend, though I don't mean that to sound egotistical or... asswipey. The copyediting thing is just for fun.
Then...get a playstation? Because I remember that whole "diagramming sentences" thnig from freshman year in high school, and I don't think I ever associated it with "fun."
Also, a 128kbps download will just not please some people. Audiophiles want the maximum quality they can get, and if they want it digital, they will rip it themselves to their own specifications.
Apple will give you the option of lossess recordings now. A lot bigger - probably half the size of a corresponding *.wav file, but it is available. And that'll allow one to effectively make a bit-correct copy of the CD.
Note that, as another responder alluded to, it would be great to do *better* than CD at some point as "CD quality" is a misnomer to some.
Actually, at first I read it as "odd copulation schemes," which makes a lot more sense, doesn't it?
Here you go. So I'm thinking a pig, some grease, four pulleys, 5 plates of 1/8" steel, 20 feet of nylon rope, a gate, a couple of AA batteries, a blasting cap, and a 40-lb bag of quick setting concrete.
Should be enough to make the "masturbation box" from the jerky boys album.
You might think the pig is superfluous to the copulation scheme, but if you think about it, I think you'll see it's an integral part.
You do know that racketerring wasn't a crime yet when Al Capone was convicted right? Tax evasion was the only illegal thing that Capone was personally doing that the government could prove. Since then the RICO act (passed in 1970) has made it illegal to, well, be a mob boss.
Yep, though the specific offenses related to racketeering were still generally illegal, such as, for example, creative methods of selling fire insurance. That was basically my point - lacking actual racketeering laws, or enough evidence to get him for something like murder, the prosecuter got him for tax evasion. Why? Had a bigger penalty than the piddling offenses they *could* prove.
I completely agree. Think about it. Ebay scammers are _already_ breaking the law, so what qualms could they possibly have about "selling on ebay without a license." That would be like passing a law that makes it illegal for drug dealers to sell without a license. The best possible impact this could have would be forcing scammers to move their operations out of state.
You do know that while Al Capone never did get convicted of racketeering related offenses, he did get a LOT of jail time for failing to report certain income, right? Sometimes it's easier to prove the ancillary charge.
That said, I'd sure like to see this thing better designed/worded.
Look, you can be as pissed off as you want. I don't really care. I said I was speaking generally. I never said I know the guy. And I still maintain that if you know anything about human motivation, and possess any logic, you can put together a likely picture from what he said. Doesn't require Sherlock Holmes.
He's been on a lot of interviews. Couldn't tel from what he said, but either he lies in interviews, or feels like all his coworkers do. He's disgruntled against people who he perceives don't code as well as him. He resents people who get by with communication skills as "corporate citizens" without playing the game. You also forget (or conveniently ignore) the part where he was complaining because he feels his CS degree was practically worthless.
Put that together - does that ensemble come from someone who feels their skills are respected? Maybe. I doubt it. Maybe he has great people skills and he'll be in management in a year, but if he did I doubt he'd be so pissed off.
This isn't a court of law, I don't have to pass reasonable doubt.
Actually, the dosimeter won't even do that -- the dosimeters don't give an indication of dose until a machine reads them. So, it'd be more like answering how much radiation a person absorbed (before and after death).
Well, if it melts, that's a good sign.;) For what it's worth, I think they also make/made a kind that changes color - ie, if this fucker turns black, run away.
That'll happen. How you respond to it is up to you. But really, I personally wouldn't want how I interacted with that person to screw my chances in a company. If you're talented, you're bound to be surrounded with people (at least some) who aren't as good. There are constructive ways of dealing with that. Condscension or insults aren't a good way.
(2) silly rules they shouldn't have to follow, but have to follow (for whatever reason).
Shit, man, that's called life. My last boss drive me near to the brink of insanity. That's when it's time for deep breathing and/or a beer. Copping an attitude about it isn't a good idea. And often, there are good reasons for things that you don't know about or understand.
It's not that the person has a hard time getting along with anyone, it's that most of the people with whom he interacts (in terms of the given project) have no idea what they're talking about, and this he is disinclined to talk to them, because it is of no use.
Look, I think I know what you mean, and minimizing the fraction of your time that incompetent people waste is NOT "bad people skills." That's "good time management." The idea is to realize they're idiots, but not to allow them to notice this. That means being friendly, trying to help them gently, trying to give them stuff to do that is within their expertise, etc. And it's not like it's their fault if they can't code as well as you. It's not an excuse to be an ass, but it is an excuse to do everything you can so your work doesn't depend on them - preferably without them noticing. That's called playing the game.
Maybe you should drop the "I know exactly who you are based on one five line post on slashdot" attitude.
I'm going off what he said. He said people who code worse than him but with social skills get jobs. He also said he's been on a lot of interviews, which means a lot of rejections unless he's currently working 8 jobs. Maybe he has great social skills, and codes great, but just got somehow unlucky despite the fact that all these people with less qualifications being hired instead. But I doubt it.
Look, I'm not trying to attack the guy. As a recent (though non-CS) grad who landed a good job off of multiple offers, I believe I understand the value of good academic and people skills. He states clearly that he believes that jobs should be based on "ability", not people skills, and also seems to belittle "good corporate citizens." That attitude generally comes from an unwillingness to work as part of a team, or a lack of understanding regarding how important teamwork is to problem solving at the corporate level. I really don't think that's going too far out on a limb.
Is this part of a full psychiatric evaluation? No. Maybe if the guy comes back, he can enlighten us both. But methinks we have someone who likes to code, is probably quite good at it, and likely has an attitude about it. He's pretty disgruntled, and you don't end up like that with no reason. I think the guy would admit that other grads who don't code as well as him play the corporate game better than he does.
They are hired strictly as good team players with good communication skills, who are good corporate citizens.
So what you're saying is, you can code OK but you have poor communication skills and can't fit in with the corporate structure.
Don't want to be mean, but it isn't your CS degree that's the problem - the people getting the jobs have those too, remember - it's your lack of social skills.
Imagine someone with good people skills who can code too? I bet that person gets the job.
I'd rather see hiring based on pure skills, but that's not how U.S IT companies do it.
Until you find this magical job that allows you to be the sole developer on your own project, people skills are relevant skills for a programmer. It seems to be something you lack, so don't be surprised by your inability to find a job you feel is commensurate with your coding abilities.
This isn't college anymore. You don't get to work by yourself. A good coder who can't interact with people is less valuable than a decent coder who can.
If you care to notice, you could learn a valuable life lesson here.
Yeah, you're a real visionary, using buggy bloatware that's incompatible with the rest of the world just so you can be an Open-source hippie. Get that vision checked.
Slashdot Mirror
No kidding. That's always been the least compeeling linux argument for me (and I say this as a user) - it is NOT possible for even a college trained programmer to go in and start playing with even a small OSS project. I'd say less than 100 Brazillians would be benefited from the "openness" angle of linux. It pretty much comes down to cost and an abstract principle that has no impact for them.
I disagree. Real nerds - as I see them, anyway - are just people who like challenges and problems. They can be reasonably adjusted, and frequently will do nerdly things with other nerds. Can even do non-nerdly things with non-nerds.
Your classic dork hangs around the nerds, pretending to understand what they're takling about, and tries to steer the conversation towards something dorky. That's what's so sad - these people who see the nerd group as being the highest social level to which they can aspire.
Which one? ;)
How about two: Doc Ruby.
Sorry, couldn't resist. But I know what you mean - the distinction I always made is that nerds are the people who like esoteria for the sake thereof; dorks are people who wish they were as smart as the nerds they hang around, being otherwise ostracized elsewhere. Dorks take up the more banal nerd pastimes, not being able to take up proper nerdly pursuits. Example: Nerds play with electronics, develop explosives, devise methods for factoring primes, etc. Not being able to do any of that, dorks fixate on Star Wars.
Saw it all the time in high school, college, etc. Nothing worse than a "Nerd groupie."
Yep. Have you seen what the judge has said to them? IBM has carried virtually all the relevant motions, and the judge has made very pointed comments about SCO's lack of anything resembling evidence. That said, there are procedures that must be followed. I think the judge is fed up with SCO, but is making sure to avoid pulling a Jackson and getting overturned on appeal due to obvious bias.
You're just lucky you're not running Debian STABLE, I think they just got KDE-1.2.
The distinction being what - that "irregardless" becomes a word simply because a number of people use it incorrectly? Irregardless of how many people use it that way, it's still incorrect. By your standard, any set of connected letters that someone incorrcetly uses in speech becomes a word. It's only in the dictionary because many people use it incorrectly.
You can split hairs all you want, you'll still sound ridiculous if you use it in speech.
You skipped the part about how it's a "word" created in America in the 20th century, from a blend of "irrespective" and "regardless." The "ir-" prefix and "-less" suffix are redundant. You also fail to mention that Webster's recommends it not be used. Dictionary.com is less kind, calling it a "blunder."
This is an example of a made up word that does not have a correct usage, but American dictionaries put it in because so many people make the mistake. Because it isn't correct usage, many people will make possibly unfounded assumptions about your intellect.
The one advantage of the iPod solution is there are probably times when you have your ipod with you, and a friend's pooter decides to toasty. You won't have a knoppix CD with you - and you probably won't have a flash drive, though some people do go pretty much everywhere with them. But your iPod? When I get one, I plan on having it surgically implanted. Thing's going everywhere.
Yeah, and remember your helmet before you go riding on the information superhighway, too.
I have to go wash my hands after typing that, yech.
Then...get a playstation? Because I remember that whole "diagramming sentences" thnig from freshman year in high school, and I don't think I ever associated it with "fun."
Apple will give you the option of lossess recordings now. A lot bigger - probably half the size of a corresponding *.wav file, but it is available. And that'll allow one to effectively make a bit-correct copy of the CD.
Note that, as another responder alluded to, it would be great to do *better* than CD at some point as "CD quality" is a misnomer to some.
Here you go. So I'm thinking a pig, some grease, four pulleys, 5 plates of 1/8" steel, 20 feet of nylon rope, a gate, a couple of AA batteries, a blasting cap, and a 40-lb bag of quick setting concrete.
Should be enough to make the "masturbation box" from the jerky boys album.
You might think the pig is superfluous to the copulation scheme, but if you think about it, I think you'll see it's an integral part.
What's this newsgroup for, anyway?
Yep, though the specific offenses related to racketeering were still generally illegal, such as, for example, creative methods of selling fire insurance. That was basically my point - lacking actual racketeering laws, or enough evidence to get him for something like murder, the prosecuter got him for tax evasion. Why? Had a bigger penalty than the piddling offenses they *could* prove.
So sombody give alan cox a free vax or something and hope he starts using it.
You do know that while Al Capone never did get convicted of racketeering related offenses, he did get a LOT of jail time for failing to report certain income, right? Sometimes it's easier to prove the ancillary charge.
That said, I'd sure like to see this thing better designed/worded.
He's been on a lot of interviews. Couldn't tel from what he said, but either he lies in interviews, or feels like all his coworkers do. He's disgruntled against people who he perceives don't code as well as him. He resents people who get by with communication skills as "corporate citizens" without playing the game. You also forget (or conveniently ignore) the part where he was complaining because he feels his CS degree was practically worthless.
Put that together - does that ensemble come from someone who feels their skills are respected? Maybe. I doubt it. Maybe he has great people skills and he'll be in management in a year, but if he did I doubt he'd be so pissed off.
This isn't a court of law, I don't have to pass reasonable doubt.
Well, if it melts, that's a good sign. ;) For what it's worth, I think they also make/made a kind that changes color - ie, if this fucker turns black, run away.
That'll happen. How you respond to it is up to you. But really, I personally wouldn't want how I interacted with that person to screw my chances in a company. If you're talented, you're bound to be surrounded with people (at least some) who aren't as good. There are constructive ways of dealing with that. Condscension or insults aren't a good way.
(2) silly rules they shouldn't have to follow, but have to follow (for whatever reason).
Shit, man, that's called life. My last boss drive me near to the brink of insanity. That's when it's time for deep breathing and/or a beer. Copping an attitude about it isn't a good idea. And often, there are good reasons for things that you don't know about or understand.
It's not that the person has a hard time getting along with anyone, it's that most of the people with whom he interacts (in terms of the given project) have no idea what they're talking about, and this he is disinclined to talk to them, because it is of no use.
Look, I think I know what you mean, and minimizing the fraction of your time that incompetent people waste is NOT "bad people skills." That's "good time management." The idea is to realize they're idiots, but not to allow them to notice this. That means being friendly, trying to help them gently, trying to give them stuff to do that is within their expertise, etc. And it's not like it's their fault if they can't code as well as you. It's not an excuse to be an ass, but it is an excuse to do everything you can so your work doesn't depend on them - preferably without them noticing. That's called playing the game.
I'm going off what he said. He said people who code worse than him but with social skills get jobs. He also said he's been on a lot of interviews, which means a lot of rejections unless he's currently working 8 jobs. Maybe he has great social skills, and codes great, but just got somehow unlucky despite the fact that all these people with less qualifications being hired instead. But I doubt it.
Look, I'm not trying to attack the guy. As a recent (though non-CS) grad who landed a good job off of multiple offers, I believe I understand the value of good academic and people skills. He states clearly that he believes that jobs should be based on "ability", not people skills, and also seems to belittle "good corporate citizens." That attitude generally comes from an unwillingness to work as part of a team, or a lack of understanding regarding how important teamwork is to problem solving at the corporate level. I really don't think that's going too far out on a limb.
Is this part of a full psychiatric evaluation? No. Maybe if the guy comes back, he can enlighten us both. But methinks we have someone who likes to code, is probably quite good at it, and likely has an attitude about it. He's pretty disgruntled, and you don't end up like that with no reason. I think the guy would admit that other grads who don't code as well as him play the corporate game better than he does.
So what you're saying is, you can code OK but you have poor communication skills and can't fit in with the corporate structure.
Don't want to be mean, but it isn't your CS degree that's the problem - the people getting the jobs have those too, remember - it's your lack of social skills.
Imagine someone with good people skills who can code too? I bet that person gets the job.
I'd rather see hiring based on pure skills, but that's not how U.S IT companies do it.
Until you find this magical job that allows you to be the sole developer on your own project, people skills are relevant skills for a programmer. It seems to be something you lack, so don't be surprised by your inability to find a job you feel is commensurate with your coding abilities.
This isn't college anymore. You don't get to work by yourself. A good coder who can't interact with people is less valuable than a decent coder who can.
If you care to notice, you could learn a valuable life lesson here.
True dat, although if same happens to a nuke worker, the dosimeter won't tell him much more than "Dude, you're fucking dead."
Yeah, you're a real visionary, using buggy bloatware that's incompatible with the rest of the world just so you can be an Open-source hippie. Get that vision checked.
I'd like my $200 now.