I haven't heard anything about it for a while, but wasn't there supposed to be a Myth-friendly distro around? It would be great if a Myth distro existed with pre-loaded support for all the major capture cards. Then you'd be able to have your PVR up and running an hour.
Apple made a decision not to support those functions in the Shuffle, because they're (a) stingy and (b) know that geeks who really ought to know better will buy a crippled device because it's made by Apple.
That undermines the "radio is cheap" argument. If it changes the bottom line cost of an iPod, most people won't want it in there because they won't use it.
Except that probably won't kill google, because those people generally use MSN search since it's built into IE, or AOL's search. I don't figure that market knows what google is.
DJ Ditty changed its name to "Ditty" to avoid confusing its fans. At a recent product launch, some people were chanting "DJ Ditty!" and some people were chanting "Ditty!" and it threw everything off. This way, everybody can just chant "Ditty!" and be on the same page.
I expect they would put it in there if it didn't significantly increase the size of the product and such. Probably not enough of their users care - I don't. Keep complaining and maybe you'll get what you want.
It'll probably never be in the nano though, that thing's pushing it as it is on size.
It's the precedent. It's that using one company's format and such to spec out business for another company can be considered illegal. The particular companies themeslves aren't interesting.
Seriously, outside of the court cases, who the hell ever heard of Roe (well, the actual person anyway) of Roe v Wade fame, or Brown of Brown v. Board of Education.
Gee, news involving chip manufacturers and the processes used to make chips from designs USED to be news that mattered to real nerds. Perhaps there are none left here?
Maybe you'd like another article about global warming or the Iraq war?
Well, outside of a very limited edition that was once released, they never would have made a non-black THinkpad, if the article is to be believed. Their focus on small business is also a shift from IBM
Besides, it would be total mystery if Earth wasn't warming up due to human activity.
Yes, but the facts often get in the way of a good theory. The evidence for mars points to the fact that at least part of the warming may not be anthropogenic.
We know CO2 is a greenhouse gas, we know we're increasing its levels by a lot, it would be a massive shock to science to find out that those two didn't mean the planet was heating up.
Unfortunately climatology isn't so simple. We also know air pollution, which goes along with CO2 forms aerosols that scatter sunlight and reduce the amount of sunlight that hits the earth's surface. We don't know how much any increase in temperature will increase cloud formation, thereby reflecting more sunlight back into space. We don't know how much the ocean will respond as a carbon sink. Etc., etc.
There are many complicated aspects of climatology that makes it a very difficult field, much more so than simply making the deduction that more CO2 = more heat. If it were that simple, you'd be a climatologist right now.
Not quite true. The gov does place a lot of taxes on phnoe service, such as the "Universal Service" fee GP was talking about. We do pay so people in the sticks can have phones instead of moving to civilization.
I am still waiting for something exicting to happen here. When the sale went through I thought that Lenovo would try to break away from the wintel model and do something cool with PPC and linux. The wait continues.
And what in God's name made you think that? They bought a division that makes laptops, running windows on intel chips. They're currently making laptops that run windows on intel chips. This should not be surprising They're in the business to make money, and linux/PPC isn't it.
Not to mention they didn't buy IBM's linux and PPC businesses.
They are doing things IBM would never have done with the Thinkpad line, but it's still a business - and I have to imagine customer demand for linux/PPC laptops is, outside of the/. market, quite low.
I'd rather you be right on this- but from the way the War on Terror and the War on Drugs is going, I see no evidence that the federal government is actually interested in security issues anymore.
By security I mean national security, so a decent part of it is "War on Terror" stuff, but there's a lot more than that, and is certainly worthwhile to pursue in my opinion. Although now that I think of it, there's a lot of nat. security work in the area of computer security as well.
I'd have a problem with the security clearance as well- my grandmother was Candadian.
That wouldn't pose a problem unless she was a Communist. If your parents were Chinese nationals, now...
It's now up to $10,000/yr- my current credit rating won't handle it.
For a state school! Gah!
I'm working on that- been enhancing my resume in that area- that's one thing State Work is good for.
Heh. There you go! I guarantee if you're willing to give it a shot, there is decent work out there. It just takes some creativity and shifting, if not changing, fields. Although while you're contracting, that could give you a chance to work on a diversity of smaller projects for resume fodder - so I'd look for the most whacked out jobs I could find.;)
I can't remember where, but I could have sworn I've seen that. Dunno how practical it would be, since fMRI is pretty expensive. But I guess if you really need to know if someone is lying...
I've got a 6 year bachelor's degree in software engineering. But as for the defense industry- China and India have that sewn up, at a quarter the cost of doing it here.
Hate to call you there, but that's absolutely wrong. The defense industry job situation here is booming, because the important work *can't* be outsourced overseas due to security issues. For the work I do, you have to be an American citizen. That's job security - good luck outsourcing that to Bangalore. In the end, the high-level work is not leaving this country at any appreciable pace. You need to get into a business where you actually meet with customers, that won't go overseas.
Right now, my company cannot hire people quickly enough. Especially PhDs/engineers, and especially people with security clearances.
You might consider a MS from a state school - don't know what tuition is in OR, but where I went, tuition was something sick like $3000/yr.
Alternatively, if you have the skill bill yourslif as an algorithm expert and get into more analyst work as opposed to development. The markit is admittedly thin for experienced people, BS only, who don't claim anything other than coding experience.
The first thing I'd say is that you're right - the mainstream software industry doesn't do much research anymore, and what is being done is being done by engineers and Ph.Ds. If that describes you, then you're OK, but if not, you're fighting an uphill battle. That's one thing. Also, these days companies actually have to show a profit - unlike the 90's, when VC money just flew in the windows and companies could screw around however they want. I can't impress enough upon you how different industry is now.
Also, try smaller companies if you're trying to get your foot in the door, *especially* if your experience/education isn't what they're used to hiring. You won't get anyone with intelligence through HR at a big company. Try some botique companies where you'll be able to possibly get in contact with the person making the hire, which allows you to directly convince them your skills and experience will translate. I had this problem too - my experience is algorithms and such, my education is chemistry. I couldn't get GE, P&G, etc to return emails. I eventually caught on with a company of about 120.
Take a look at your resume too - definitely stress what you've accomplished as opposed to what you know (you need both, but they're impressed by your ability to lead projects and such). Show the applications of your skills. Try to put a diversity of experiences on there, because you never know what'll catch a manager's eye.
The bottom line is that jobs are out there. I know you're frustrated, but you've got to take the attitude that you'll get it done somehow, and figure out how to get there. Right now you seem to have convinced yourself that you can't get a job - I don't want to sound like some idiot self-help guru, but as long as you think that way you'll be right.
If you can't/won't go back for further education, then take your time and find some small company that develops algorithms for specific applications. That would allow you to learn their business as you do your job. After a few years in a job like that, you have a new skillset and field-specific training. I would definitely look outside the realm of the classic software industry, because you're right, they're cutting jobs wherever they can. You're right, they're outsourcing - that means it's damned important to know how to do things that the average Bangalorian doesn't.
Also consider where growth is. I tell you what, nothing's growing faster than the defense industry. What's your education level? They need lots of math-inclined people, analysts, etc.
It's possible- I've been out of the job market for 2 years now. Do you know of any good software R&D jobs? I'd much rather be doing that than building back end objects in ancient computer languages to manage EEO information for the state.
Well, the question is what field you want to do R&D for? Software is not in and of itself R&D (well, the D part). My company does almost all R, with a little D that sometimes involves software. If I were you, I'd talk up the non-programming skills that you have, especially if you have training or anything in either business or the sciences.
Nope. And that's where the problem lies.
Ouch. I feel really bad for you, because that's the group of people getting hit the hardest. It might be worth it to try to get on with a company that does some applied research, even if it's a lower-paying job than you'd like, if it helps you learn some non-coding jobs.
True enough- that was a HUGE mistake, one that I cannot get out of easily.
That really sucks. Surely if housing has gone up there you have some equity, though?
Those days could come back- and more- but it would take courage that is not seen in this land anymore. I'm learning permaculture- I see that as the future since America can't be bothered to innovate anymore and the credit train is going to run out eventually.
Nah, the mid 90s was a bubble built on speculation and fake money. The first thing you have to realize is the 90's wasn't even real. It was fantasyland. But there are good jobs out there - the problem is, there are fewer jobs for programmers now, and lots more programmers. That's a disaster. My advice to you is to distinguish yourself somehow from the horde of IT people. Get some training in business or science, either from a school or from a company where you work undervalued for a while as you pick it up.
And good luck. I lucked out a bit - I liked science and CS, majored in chemistry with a minor in CS, eventually wen to grad school and worked on projects dealing with algorithms to deal with sensor data. From that I got an R&D job...coding. I didn't know that was practically the ideal path at the time, but it's what Uninversities are highly recommending these days. Jobs want to see a different skillset these days compared to the mid 90s.
I'm a biochemist myself (not the OP), but I have to say - if you are a chemist, then both of our opinions on climatology are basically at layperson level (slightly better perhaps, because we understand the process of science in general).
Right-o.
I'd have to say that if the overwhelming majority of climatologists and those in related fields are able to agree both on the occurrence of global warming as fact, and the involvement of human activities in exacerbating global warming (with the level of effect still debated), then perhaps it is you who don't have a proper handle on the field?
Not what I meant. I mean there are a lot of scientists trying to point out what I basically said - that the models differ too much to call a consensus, and that there are a lot of factors that are too difficult to treat analytically to predict going forward (like scattering from aerosol, how to predict cloud growth and reflectivity from them, etc). The majority is trying, in my opinion, to paint the scenario as if they have a better consensus than they do. As far as raw number predictions, the error bars I've seen are as large as the trend itself.
I know it is quite possible for scientists to move between quite disparate fields, but to offer your opinion as a "scientist" both you and the original poster should be making sure you are completely up-to-date on the relevant research.
It can be annoying when certain community groups jump the gun and make stronger claims than are supported by the science involved, but I see no evidence that the field of climatology is guilty of your assertions - I suggest that perhaps you haven't availed yourself fully of the total research available.
Well, I might be a bit more knowledgeable than I originally let on - my grad advisor was *heavily* involved with this stuff, so we'd get almost weekly doses of this stuff. So my knowledge base might be a tad better off than you might imagine.
The phrase which raises a warning with me is your statement that "claiming any sort of accuracy in terms of climate prediction seems ridiculous given the current models". I've seen similar statements before - from creationists and Intelligent Design followers regarding evolution. That is a statement of rhetoric, rather than good scientific debate.
Them's fighting words to a scientist. How about I rephrase - given the extremely large sigma with regard to the summary of the predicted trends, assigning a convergence to the population is unwarranted. That better for you?
I don't have the background to judge the "current models" but many here do. In future, if you want to claim you have done the homework and found some science wanting, then you should state what your specific concerns are. To do otherwise is not only pointless, but actively harmful to other laypeople's views, since you are claiming your view under the guise of professional scientist.
I don't know the climatology, but I do know the statistics, and much of the stronger claims that are made - by which I don't mean individual research papers, but rather the policy aggregations made by advocates - are simply not statistically valid within any reasonable confidence interval, and that I will state authoritatively. Stating that there is a distinct temperature increase - check. Stating that it is probably anthromorphic - check. Stating that it is without a doubt anthromorphic, as I've heard people claim - I don't think so.
I am too, so at least believe me when I say I know what you're talking about.
Fine with me. All I know is that in the 1990s, businesses were willing to spend money on R&D- and now they aren't. At all.
Huh? No R&D for what industry? As someone who got one of those nonexistent R&D jobs this year, I'm going to have to question that. R&D hiring has bounced back rather well in most science fields since 2000.
Portland wasn't a high cost of living market to begin with- and it's still about 50% what it is in other cities- but it's most certainly on the rise and has been for the last 5 years.
Yeah, I'm in DC so no believe me, it's a lot worse here.
And even then. I have 42 languages and 10 years of R&D on my resume- and the best I can do is contracting for the state at a rather low rate- far too low to support my lifestyle apparently.
The number of languages you know isn't an indication of your value, if you spend time learning more than a handfull you're wasting your time and employers won't be impressed. What were your 10 yrs R&D spent doing? And when I said diversity of skills, I didn't mean the number of programming languages you know. What are you trained in other than programming? Are you trained in anything to which you might apply that programming skill?
Seriously? Just stay in my house without getting kicked out by the bank or being forced into bankruptcy. I've downgraded my dreams seriously.
Well, yeah. Owning a house on sporadic contracting work isn't going to cut it. I'm completely guessing here, but if your work history started in 95 and got tough in the last 5 years, you might find that the world you knew 95-2000 isn't a realistic one. Your expectations might not match reality. I don't own a house, if you live in a big city that is quite a luxury.
Honestly - and I mean absolutely no offense - but I don't think I'd blame macroeconomics for your problems. There are quite likely things you can to to better your situation, and there are full time jobs that certainly can be had. And I don't mean to be condescending or judgemental if anything came off that way. But the mid 90's are never coming back, and it may take some pride swallowing to take a position that might not be ideal but gets you on the path you want.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, when did this stop being Appledot?
I haven't heard anything about it for a while, but wasn't there supposed to be a Myth-friendly distro around? It would be great if a Myth distro existed with pre-loaded support for all the major capture cards. Then you'd be able to have your PVR up and running an hour.
They do, we're it.
Hey, I wonder what Google's doing today, I haven't heard anything about them lately.
That undermines the "radio is cheap" argument. If it changes the bottom line cost of an iPod, most people won't want it in there because they won't use it.
Except that probably won't kill google, because those people generally use MSN search since it's built into IE, or AOL's search. I don't figure that market knows what google is.
DJ Ditty changed its name to "Ditty" to avoid confusing its fans. At a recent product launch, some people were chanting "DJ Ditty!" and some people were chanting "Ditty!" and it threw everything off. This way, everybody can just chant "Ditty!" and be on the same page.
It'll probably never be in the nano though, that thing's pushing it as it is on size.
Seriously, outside of the court cases, who the hell ever heard of Roe (well, the actual person anyway) of Roe v Wade fame, or Brown of Brown v. Board of Education.
Or...you could run it in Wine? There's no reason to run it in a VM unless you're sandboxing. VMs are a pain in the ass way to do it.
Maybe you'd like another article about global warming or the Iraq war?
So what if you need to do both, you have one box, and dual booting isn't an option?
Tell that to NIST and ANSI.
Well, outside of a very limited edition that was once released, they never would have made a non-black THinkpad, if the article is to be believed. Their focus on small business is also a shift from IBM
Yes, but the facts often get in the way of a good theory. The evidence for mars points to the fact that at least part of the warming may not be anthropogenic.
We know CO2 is a greenhouse gas, we know we're increasing its levels by a lot, it would be a massive shock to science to find out that those two didn't mean the planet was heating up.
Unfortunately climatology isn't so simple. We also know air pollution, which goes along with CO2 forms aerosols that scatter sunlight and reduce the amount of sunlight that hits the earth's surface. We don't know how much any increase in temperature will increase cloud formation, thereby reflecting more sunlight back into space. We don't know how much the ocean will respond as a carbon sink. Etc., etc.
There are many complicated aspects of climatology that makes it a very difficult field, much more so than simply making the deduction that more CO2 = more heat. If it were that simple, you'd be a climatologist right now.
Not quite true. The gov does place a lot of taxes on phnoe service, such as the "Universal Service" fee GP was talking about. We do pay so people in the sticks can have phones instead of moving to civilization.
We know, Taco
And what in God's name made you think that? They bought a division that makes laptops, running windows on intel chips. They're currently making laptops that run windows on intel chips. This should not be surprising They're in the business to make money, and linux/PPC isn't it.
Not to mention they didn't buy IBM's linux and PPC businesses.
They are doing things IBM would never have done with the Thinkpad line, but it's still a business - and I have to imagine customer demand for linux/PPC laptops is, outside of the /. market, quite low.
By security I mean national security, so a decent part of it is "War on Terror" stuff, but there's a lot more than that, and is certainly worthwhile to pursue in my opinion. Although now that I think of it, there's a lot of nat. security work in the area of computer security as well.
I'd have a problem with the security clearance as well- my grandmother was Candadian.
That wouldn't pose a problem unless she was a Communist. If your parents were Chinese nationals, now...
It's now up to $10,000/yr- my current credit rating won't handle it.
For a state school! Gah!
I'm working on that- been enhancing my resume in that area- that's one thing State Work is good for.
Heh. There you go! I guarantee if you're willing to give it a shot, there is decent work out there. It just takes some creativity and shifting, if not changing, fields. Although while you're contracting, that could give you a chance to work on a diversity of smaller projects for resume fodder - so I'd look for the most whacked out jobs I could find. ;)
I can't remember where, but I could have sworn I've seen that. Dunno how practical it would be, since fMRI is pretty expensive. But I guess if you really need to know if someone is lying...
Hate to call you there, but that's absolutely wrong. The defense industry job situation here is booming, because the important work *can't* be outsourced overseas due to security issues. For the work I do, you have to be an American citizen. That's job security - good luck outsourcing that to Bangalore. In the end, the high-level work is not leaving this country at any appreciable pace. You need to get into a business where you actually meet with customers, that won't go overseas.
Right now, my company cannot hire people quickly enough. Especially PhDs/engineers, and especially people with security clearances.
You might consider a MS from a state school - don't know what tuition is in OR, but where I went, tuition was something sick like $3000/yr.
Alternatively, if you have the skill bill yourslif as an algorithm expert and get into more analyst work as opposed to development. The markit is admittedly thin for experienced people, BS only, who don't claim anything other than coding experience.
Also, try smaller companies if you're trying to get your foot in the door, *especially* if your experience/education isn't what they're used to hiring. You won't get anyone with intelligence through HR at a big company. Try some botique companies where you'll be able to possibly get in contact with the person making the hire, which allows you to directly convince them your skills and experience will translate. I had this problem too - my experience is algorithms and such, my education is chemistry. I couldn't get GE, P&G, etc to return emails. I eventually caught on with a company of about 120.
Take a look at your resume too - definitely stress what you've accomplished as opposed to what you know (you need both, but they're impressed by your ability to lead projects and such). Show the applications of your skills. Try to put a diversity of experiences on there, because you never know what'll catch a manager's eye.
The bottom line is that jobs are out there. I know you're frustrated, but you've got to take the attitude that you'll get it done somehow, and figure out how to get there. Right now you seem to have convinced yourself that you can't get a job - I don't want to sound like some idiot self-help guru, but as long as you think that way you'll be right.
If you can't/won't go back for further education, then take your time and find some small company that develops algorithms for specific applications. That would allow you to learn their business as you do your job. After a few years in a job like that, you have a new skillset and field-specific training. I would definitely look outside the realm of the classic software industry, because you're right, they're cutting jobs wherever they can. You're right, they're outsourcing - that means it's damned important to know how to do things that the average Bangalorian doesn't.
Also consider where growth is. I tell you what, nothing's growing faster than the defense industry. What's your education level? They need lots of math-inclined people, analysts, etc.
Well, the question is what field you want to do R&D for? Software is not in and of itself R&D (well, the D part). My company does almost all R, with a little D that sometimes involves software. If I were you, I'd talk up the non-programming skills that you have, especially if you have training or anything in either business or the sciences.
Nope. And that's where the problem lies.
Ouch. I feel really bad for you, because that's the group of people getting hit the hardest. It might be worth it to try to get on with a company that does some applied research, even if it's a lower-paying job than you'd like, if it helps you learn some non-coding jobs.
True enough- that was a HUGE mistake, one that I cannot get out of easily.
That really sucks. Surely if housing has gone up there you have some equity, though?
Those days could come back- and more- but it would take courage that is not seen in this land anymore. I'm learning permaculture- I see that as the future since America can't be bothered to innovate anymore and the credit train is going to run out eventually.
Nah, the mid 90s was a bubble built on speculation and fake money. The first thing you have to realize is the 90's wasn't even real. It was fantasyland. But there are good jobs out there - the problem is, there are fewer jobs for programmers now, and lots more programmers. That's a disaster. My advice to you is to distinguish yourself somehow from the horde of IT people. Get some training in business or science, either from a school or from a company where you work undervalued for a while as you pick it up.
And good luck. I lucked out a bit - I liked science and CS, majored in chemistry with a minor in CS, eventually wen to grad school and worked on projects dealing with algorithms to deal with sensor data. From that I got an R&D job...coding. I didn't know that was practically the ideal path at the time, but it's what Uninversities are highly recommending these days. Jobs want to see a different skillset these days compared to the mid 90s.
Right-o.
I'd have to say that if the overwhelming majority of climatologists and those in related fields are able to agree both on the occurrence of global warming as fact, and the involvement of human activities in exacerbating global warming (with the level of effect still debated), then perhaps it is you who don't have a proper handle on the field?
Not what I meant. I mean there are a lot of scientists trying to point out what I basically said - that the models differ too much to call a consensus, and that there are a lot of factors that are too difficult to treat analytically to predict going forward (like scattering from aerosol, how to predict cloud growth and reflectivity from them, etc). The majority is trying, in my opinion, to paint the scenario as if they have a better consensus than they do. As far as raw number predictions, the error bars I've seen are as large as the trend itself.
I know it is quite possible for scientists to move between quite disparate fields, but to offer your opinion as a "scientist" both you and the original poster should be making sure you are completely up-to-date on the relevant research. It can be annoying when certain community groups jump the gun and make stronger claims than are supported by the science involved, but I see no evidence that the field of climatology is guilty of your assertions - I suggest that perhaps you haven't availed yourself fully of the total research available.
Well, I might be a bit more knowledgeable than I originally let on - my grad advisor was *heavily* involved with this stuff, so we'd get almost weekly doses of this stuff. So my knowledge base might be a tad better off than you might imagine.
The phrase which raises a warning with me is your statement that "claiming any sort of accuracy in terms of climate prediction seems ridiculous given the current models". I've seen similar statements before - from creationists and Intelligent Design followers regarding evolution. That is a statement of rhetoric, rather than good scientific debate.
Them's fighting words to a scientist. How about I rephrase - given the extremely large sigma with regard to the summary of the predicted trends, assigning a convergence to the population is unwarranted. That better for you?
I don't have the background to judge the "current models" but many here do. In future, if you want to claim you have done the homework and found some science wanting, then you should state what your specific concerns are. To do otherwise is not only pointless, but actively harmful to other laypeople's views, since you are claiming your view under the guise of professional scientist.
I don't know the climatology, but I do know the statistics, and much of the stronger claims that are made - by which I don't mean individual research papers, but rather the policy aggregations made by advocates - are simply not statistically valid within any reasonable confidence interval, and that I will state authoritatively. Stating that there is a distinct temperature increase - check. Stating that it is probably anthromorphic - check. Stating that it is without a doubt anthromorphic, as I've heard people claim - I don't think so.
I am too, so at least believe me when I say I know what you're talking about.
Fine with me. All I know is that in the 1990s, businesses were willing to spend money on R&D- and now they aren't. At all.
Huh? No R&D for what industry? As someone who got one of those nonexistent R&D jobs this year, I'm going to have to question that. R&D hiring has bounced back rather well in most science fields since 2000.
Portland wasn't a high cost of living market to begin with- and it's still about 50% what it is in other cities- but it's most certainly on the rise and has been for the last 5 years.
Yeah, I'm in DC so no believe me, it's a lot worse here.
And even then. I have 42 languages and 10 years of R&D on my resume- and the best I can do is contracting for the state at a rather low rate- far too low to support my lifestyle apparently.
The number of languages you know isn't an indication of your value, if you spend time learning more than a handfull you're wasting your time and employers won't be impressed. What were your 10 yrs R&D spent doing? And when I said diversity of skills, I didn't mean the number of programming languages you know. What are you trained in other than programming? Are you trained in anything to which you might apply that programming skill?
Seriously? Just stay in my house without getting kicked out by the bank or being forced into bankruptcy. I've downgraded my dreams seriously.
Well, yeah. Owning a house on sporadic contracting work isn't going to cut it. I'm completely guessing here, but if your work history started in 95 and got tough in the last 5 years, you might find that the world you knew 95-2000 isn't a realistic one. Your expectations might not match reality. I don't own a house, if you live in a big city that is quite a luxury.
Honestly - and I mean absolutely no offense - but I don't think I'd blame macroeconomics for your problems. There are quite likely things you can to to better your situation, and there are full time jobs that certainly can be had. And I don't mean to be condescending or judgemental if anything came off that way. But the mid 90's are never coming back, and it may take some pride swallowing to take a position that might not be ideal but gets you on the path you want.