It can also be an issue of looking in the right pool
In this case 50% of young adults. If that isn't the right pool then it's time to shut up shop. The above poster appears to be pushing an agenda instead of being connected to reality.
I thought I was merely stating what should be "common sense" but is not - fish from a small pool and you have little chance of getting the best. WTF is it with all the baggage?
The point of engineering positions is usually about getting someone capable of doing something new when required - the person who writes the standard operating procedure instead of just following it. While the actual job may be following the checklist 99.9% of the time it's useful to have someone around that knows why the list is what it is and can work out how to change stuff when circumstances change. At least that's how I see it and why there are hardly any engineering jobs available in downturns when places are focused on just keeping going and not doing anything new even if it saves them money.
Your example is more like someone with no job is using two weeks of their own time to show you they know their ass from their elbow
So what do they eat while that is going on?
Libertarians are so naive that it is frightening. All you'd do in the above is select for people with other means of support, so you would choose those who are far more likely to quit than others.
Why not some training by the employers who want someone to do a specific task instead? Oh that's right, that's "commie talk" - instead we have to socialize the costs but privatize the benefits and let those losers who can't evade tax pay for it. That's the "conservative" way in a lot of places but neither really conservative or really a capitalist way to do things. It's just a different way to have welfare.
Absolutely. Not everyone is capable of doing every job, no matter how much training you give them
Completely irrelevant when you have a very large pool of people to choose from. I'm sure you are very much aware of that. Suggesting otherwise would be insulting your intelligence a great deal. What are you trying to do here?
I may be far too old-fashioned for this site but back in the day we used to train people. We'd even give students scholarships if a degree was required to understand how to do the job. None of this "replaceable work unit" shit that is a sign of an inability to manage yet is the MBA catch cry.
It's really not all that far away in any respect from the British Royal Navy of centuries back. Even the "five year voyage" of the opening titles is inspired by a voyage of H.M.S. Beagle. Outside of periods of war a Navy is "a peaceful diplomatic and exploration organization that also handles defence when needed". That's what seems to be the model before it was tweaked a bit and took on some later U.S. Navy characteristics in various stories.
If you wanted to troll, this have asked what a post-Clinton universe would look like.
A real troll would point out that the Russians and Chinese are the ones doing manned space flight these days so post-Clinton or post-Trump isn't going to matter with a space spanning "Federation" or "Empire".
I find it fascinating how frequently people who decry corporatism and cultural in the US then turn around and demand "diversity" in companies
Now you are just being a prick and attacking a strawman that you've written my name on. Why bother to go that far? It has absolutely nothing to do with what we have discussed above and reflects very poorly on you.
Maybe you shouldn't, just don't confuse your own situation with the wider world, that's all..
I said "niche". Did you not understand that or are you deliberately putting words in my mouth that are not there just to win some fucking stupid mass debating argument game? Just accept that your blanket cases above is not correct absolutely everywhere and move on instead of being dishonest for some trivial reason.
He's very busy reinventing wheels poorly without properly understanding the previous implementation, sometimes not even on a newbie level because he just will not listen so remains a newbie. No problem, we just have to rewrite a pile of scripts with his incredibly verbose new syntax, watch them run and silently fail, then just keep on changing bits and pieces until they work, for the moment, via the moving target black box of systemd. Or we can just use old systems that work until Lennart sees the next shiny thing and another developer comes in to make the project stable. Read his blog. The guy is an incompetent prick that is using RedHat and interproject politics to force us to use his toy instead of it being used on it's own merits.
He grew up with it and used it up until graduation = background. Despite time passing he hasn't really picked up on the new environment. It shows. Read his blog. You can see the mindset at work there. He just does not get this messy *nix thing and wants to "fix" Redhat's platform to make it like the "modern" MSDOS with a GUI under the control of a single entity that he is used to.
No sane modern OS would ever implement the current Linux scheme with unrestricted ability for users to run arbitrary programs after logout
What do you base what appears to me to be an utterly ridiculous statement on? Do you not understand that even today there are tasks that take a very long time to solve with computers? With what appears to be a very limited understanding on your part at first glance, just so I can get an idea of what on earth you are going on about, what would you call an example of a "sane modern OS"?
In this example we've seen that it is a three dimensional problem, a problem differentiating between sky and painted truck and an edge case with no available rules in the car system. There is no such thing as an "expert system" that can solve such a problem in a production car and lab robots don't seem to be there yet either. The poster above is reacting as if it is, whether through real stupidity or pretended stupidity I do not know.
A few years ago I looked at some old copies of a magazine called "Radio and Hobbies" at a relative's house. In an issue from 1948 there were photos of a prototype parking device like this.
It depends entirely on how narrow the monoculture is whether it can adapt and survive when faced with the "weird world outside". That applies to all of your examples above.
Anyway this discussion is pointless since I was just pointing out a common problem with inexperienced HR people who will ignore selection criteria when faced with someone who likes the same football team. You end up with a nice little drinking club but are fishing from a shallow pool while competitors employ the capable and may drive your nice little drinking club out of business.
Yes, but those are special situations in locked down VMs, not general purpose Windows desktops with open access to the Internet (or I sure as heck hope not anyway)
No those too. A real firewall upstream and full antivirus/antispyware makes them no less exposed to malware than Win10 protected in the same way and far more robust than Win10 with nothing but MS Defender. Pretty sad isn't it?
Everything from drivers to software will slowly move on
Not yet, WinXP drivers still seem to come with everything and the only stuff I've seen demand better than WinXP to run is games. Of course it's a stupid choice if you plan to use more than tiny amounts of memory, but it still seems to work for those who don't need much.
but try installing a modern video card on XP
I did - look at the Nvidia website to clear up the misconception.
Yea, yea, of course you're not, remind me what the Linux desktop marketshare in 2016 is? That's right, almost nothing.
Since engineering workstations are a niche ignored by MS why should I care about marketshare instead of using something that works?
Yea, yea... everyone said that about Windows XP as well, yet how many of you are still running that?
In my workplace probably around ten systems, one of them less than two years old (user wanted it). If you count virtual machines of WinXP on *nix boxes add more than a dozen more if they were all fired up at once. A combination of some stuff not working on Vista and up plus MS Office working with no problems on WinXP means that there is far more of it about than you appear to think. Yes, it sucks for running anything that needs more than trivial amounts of memory but some people are not running things that need much memory.
By 2020 it will be 11 years old, technology and time marches on...
Sadly not as quick as I'd like. A long list of things that were "already in Longhorn" according to Balmer are still not in MS Win10. It's not really a big improvement on Win2k in a lot of ways (note that Win2k doesn't have the artificial memory ceiling that WinXP has). That amazing new NTFS we were going to get still is not there so WinXP can still read new stuff - time hasn't really marched on when the old stuff can use what the new stuff does and more since it is still compatible with the old applications.
Are you being sarcastic or do you really think Tesla have managed to do what Boeing and all the rest have not managed to do?
Are we going to learn next that Teslas don't brake for cyclists??
I do not understand. Why would you think they do in the first place? Perfect SF movie artificial intelligence has not been invented and installed in a car. Are you being serious?
Not necessarily. Maybe the rest of the automation had been so good that the driver saw the struck, but believed the car also saw the truck. If you are a passenger in a car, you don't pull the handbrake to avoid an accident when you expect the driver is going to press the foot brake.
If that was the case then the A.I. cargo cult has gone way too far so we have to very actively inform people that they are not in a SF movie and the machine is way too dumb to do their thinking for them.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps you should have read my entire very short post before replying. Your answer was in the third sentence.
In this case 50% of young adults. If that isn't the right pool then it's time to shut up shop.
The above poster appears to be pushing an agenda instead of being connected to reality.
I thought I was merely stating what should be "common sense" but is not - fish from a small pool and you have little chance of getting the best.
WTF is it with all the baggage?
The point of engineering positions is usually about getting someone capable of doing something new when required - the person who writes the standard operating procedure instead of just following it. While the actual job may be following the checklist 99.9% of the time it's useful to have someone around that knows why the list is what it is and can work out how to change stuff when circumstances change.
At least that's how I see it and why there are hardly any engineering jobs available in downturns when places are focused on just keeping going and not doing anything new even if it saves them money.
So what do they eat while that is going on?
Libertarians are so naive that it is frightening. All you'd do in the above is select for people with other means of support, so you would choose those who are far more likely to quit than others.
Why not some training by the employers who want someone to do a specific task instead?
Oh that's right, that's "commie talk" - instead we have to socialize the costs but privatize the benefits and let those losers who can't evade tax pay for it. That's the "conservative" way in a lot of places but neither really conservative or really a capitalist way to do things. It's just a different way to have welfare.
Completely irrelevant when you have a very large pool of people to choose from.
I'm sure you are very much aware of that. Suggesting otherwise would be insulting your intelligence a great deal.
What are you trying to do here?
Any time from the year 2000 onwards I could have found you hundreds. Did you forget that it really started taking off in 1995?
I may be far too old-fashioned for this site but back in the day we used to train people. We'd even give students scholarships if a degree was required to understand how to do the job. None of this "replaceable work unit" shit that is a sign of an inability to manage yet is the MBA catch cry.
It's really not all that far away in any respect from the British Royal Navy of centuries back. Even the "five year voyage" of the opening titles is inspired by a voyage of H.M.S. Beagle. Outside of periods of war a Navy is "a peaceful diplomatic and exploration organization that also handles defence when needed".
That's what seems to be the model before it was tweaked a bit and took on some later U.S. Navy characteristics in various stories.
A real troll would point out that the Russians and Chinese are the ones doing manned space flight these days so post-Clinton or post-Trump isn't going to matter with a space spanning "Federation" or "Empire".
The Blakes 7 setting was a reaction to how fake the Trek Federation was.
Now you are just being a prick and attacking a strawman that you've written my name on. Why bother to go that far? It has absolutely nothing to do with what we have discussed above and reflects very poorly on you.
I said "niche". Did you not understand that or are you deliberately putting words in my mouth that are not there just to win some fucking stupid mass debating argument game?
Just accept that your blanket cases above is not correct absolutely everywhere and move on instead of being dishonest for some trivial reason.
You really had to go full fanboy didn't you?
He's very busy reinventing wheels poorly without properly understanding the previous implementation, sometimes not even on a newbie level because he just will not listen so remains a newbie.
No problem, we just have to rewrite a pile of scripts with his incredibly verbose new syntax, watch them run and silently fail, then just keep on changing bits and pieces until they work, for the moment, via the moving target black box of systemd.
Or we can just use old systems that work until Lennart sees the next shiny thing and another developer comes in to make the project stable.
Read his blog. The guy is an incompetent prick that is using RedHat and interproject politics to force us to use his toy instead of it being used on it's own merits.
Read his blog. You can see the mindset at work there. He just does not get this messy *nix thing and wants to "fix" Redhat's platform to make it like the "modern" MSDOS with a GUI under the control of a single entity that he is used to.
What do you base what appears to me to be an utterly ridiculous statement on? Do you not understand that even today there are tasks that take a very long time to solve with computers? With what appears to be a very limited understanding on your part at first glance, just so I can get an idea of what on earth you are going on about, what would you call an example of a "sane modern OS"?
In this example we've seen that it is a three dimensional problem, a problem differentiating between sky and painted truck and an edge case with no available rules in the car system. There is no such thing as an "expert system" that can solve such a problem in a production car and lab robots don't seem to be there yet either. The poster above is reacting as if it is, whether through real stupidity or pretended stupidity I do not know.
My point is that since the lesser case has not been fully solved it's a bit much to expect the more complex case to be fully solved.
A few years ago I looked at some old copies of a magazine called "Radio and Hobbies" at a relative's house. In an issue from 1948 there were photos of a prototype parking device like this.
It depends entirely on how narrow the monoculture is whether it can adapt and survive when faced with the "weird world outside". That applies to all of your examples above.
Anyway this discussion is pointless since I was just pointing out a common problem with inexperienced HR people who will ignore selection criteria when faced with someone who likes the same football team. You end up with a nice little drinking club but are fishing from a shallow pool while competitors employ the capable and may drive your nice little drinking club out of business.
No those too. A real firewall upstream and full antivirus/antispyware makes them no less exposed to malware than Win10 protected in the same way and far more robust than Win10 with nothing but MS Defender. Pretty sad isn't it?
Not yet, WinXP drivers still seem to come with everything and the only stuff I've seen demand better than WinXP to run is games. Of course it's a stupid choice if you plan to use more than tiny amounts of memory, but it still seems to work for those who don't need much.
I did - look at the Nvidia website to clear up the misconception.
Since engineering workstations are a niche ignored by MS why should I care about marketshare instead of using something that works?
In my workplace probably around ten systems, one of them less than two years old (user wanted it). If you count virtual machines of WinXP on *nix boxes add more than a dozen more if they were all fired up at once.
A combination of some stuff not working on Vista and up plus MS Office working with no problems on WinXP means that there is far more of it about than you appear to think.
Yes, it sucks for running anything that needs more than trivial amounts of memory but some people are not running things that need much memory.
Sadly not as quick as I'd like. A long list of things that were "already in Longhorn" according to Balmer are still not in MS Win10. It's not really a big improvement on Win2k in a lot of ways (note that Win2k doesn't have the artificial memory ceiling that WinXP has). That amazing new NTFS we were going to get still is not there so WinXP can still read new stuff - time hasn't really marched on when the old stuff can use what the new stuff does and more since it is still compatible with the old applications.
I do not understand. Why would you think they do in the first place? Perfect SF movie artificial intelligence has not been invented and installed in a car. Are you being serious?
Then that is Darwin award territory.
If that was the case then the A.I. cargo cult has gone way too far so we have to very actively inform people that they are not in a SF movie and the machine is way too dumb to do their thinking for them.