There was no courage in this. People have been lampooning presidents since the first joke about wooden teeth. It doesn't take big brassy balls to do this, just some bad jokes. Stop making this out to be some sort of heroic act.
I'm starting to get scared about how unbalanced some of you people are. Some comic makes fun of the president to his face and you wet your pants in glee. The attention this story is getting is disturbing.
In twenty five years of computing, twenty of it online in some form or antoher, I have never once had any sort of malware infect my systems. No viruses, no worms, no trojans, no spyware, no adware. Never. Neither have I had the clap.
People are apathetic because they know the "indignation" is pure partisanship. Where was Mr. Specter during the Clinton years? Where was ANY of the left during the Clinton years? There's nothing the Bush administration is doing that the Clinton administration didn't do first in some form. He might have turned a blind eye to terrorism, but he certainly was tapping phone without specific warrants.
I'm not defending Bush, I'm condemning today's spineless liberals who give a free pass to anything a liberal politician does. People are apathetic because you treat good and evil like it was a game.
No, the point is that sites for free screensavers, games, and lyrics are all full of spyware.
It's like saying users can't tell which scraggy whore has the clap, so they should all buy new McAfee Anti-Itch cream so they can keep on screwing scraggy whores with the clap. If you compare users with the clap to users without the clap, you notice a strong correlation to choice of partner.
For piercings, get some plain studs for the interview. For the tattoos, wear a long sleeve shirt. If your tattoos are bold and obnoxious, you may need to resign yourself that you made a bad choice.
After you get interviewed, things may change. The rule for ANY job is not make waves. If everyone wears a suit and tie, then you're going to have to wear a suit and tie. The dress codes for most IT and engineering departments is casual, so you probably won't have to. I wear teeshirts and jeans, and only shave every other day. Moderate hoop earrings would not be a problem at my work. If the dress code is a concern for you, then ask at the interview, or ask for a tour of the building(s) and see what everyone is wearing.
Jeezus I wish I could find hiring managers like you guys.
No, you just need to learn how to get a job. Life isn't fair, and one of the unfair things about it is that it's "who you know, not what you know." So start knowing people. Start networking. Start joining organizations. Even if you don't know anyone at the company, a bit of research may get you the name of someone in the IT or engineering department you can send your resume to instead.
The HR rep at my current job didn't want to hire me, but fortunately I knew a couple of people there, and did an end run around that asshole. This is commonplace. The reason we old farts have an advantage over you younglings is that we know more people.
Also, you need to learn to sell yourself. That means knowing salesmanship. If you get stuck with an HR puke, stop selling to get hired (because their job is to NOT hire you), and start selling to get a second interview with someone clueful. Be positive, use a firm handshake, don't stammer, etc. Get a haircut and wear a tie. For someone right out of university indoctrination, it sounds corny, but it's how the real world works.
Having been on the receiving end of my resume being sent to the trash bin, regardless of experience, simply because I did not have that degree that you are mocking shows me that you are being a bit misleading.
I'm not knocking your degree. In fact, I don't have a CS/CE degree. Heck, I don't even an 'S' in my degree. I'm a literature major! My point is, if you want to be hired for a skilled position, you need to demonstrate that you have the skills.
The world is different today than fifty years ago. College has become like high school. Everyone has a degree, so degrees are nothing special. That piece of paper is no longer a free ticket for a job.
The starting salary only applies for those graduates who get jobs in the first place.
Having recently interviewed several candidates on campus, I'm starting to see why they're not getting hired. Most are unmotivated, but a lack of income will soon fix that. The real problem is that they don't have any real world skills. A university CS/CE graduate should either have enough hand-on programming experience to know which end of a compiler goes up, or enough theoretical knowledge to know the difference between the basic data structures. I'm not getting that from the candidates I'm interviewing.
Unless the universities straighten up, I think the future of university graduates is an extra year at DeVry/ITT just to get the skills to be employable.
Is it that hard to understand that the majority of the world still uses office 97 or 2000?
No it's not hard to understand. But so what? Are you suggesting that Apple flush OSX down the toilet and ship Windows instead because that's what the majority of the world uses?
What you people don't understand is that Apple doesn't have to get a 100% market share in order to succeed. It's a success TODAY with a mere 5% share. IBM did what you suggested, and had 110% Windows compatibility, shipped all their systems with Windows, etc., and they LOST the desktop. Apple never did any of that, and they're still on the desktop going strong and gaining new customers every day.
If Linux systems ever want to develop greater market penetration and actually challenge the dominance of Windows...
If that were the goal, you would be correct. But let me clue you in on something. Torvald's motto of "world domination", is a joke! He isn't being serious! I'm sorry you didn't understand this before, but now you do.
Some people use Linux (and other Free operating systems) precisely because they are free and unencumbered. To hostage them to a proprietary driver is nonsense. We're not talking about some end user application, we're talking about the kernel itself. There had damned well be a better reason than market penetration to do so.
At the same time I'm not an enviromentalist by any stretch (e.g. if my girlfriend didn't force me to I wouldn't recycle anything) and I'm very much pro-nuke. Hell, I'm largely a lassiez-faire capitalist.
As someone who lives in the San Fransisco Bay Area, let me warn you that people like you are not wanted. The SFBA is the capital of tolerance, and will tolerate anything... except disagreement.
Admittedly I'm a libertarian
OMG! The only thing stopping San Fransisco from publicly beheading libertarians is the lack of a guillotine!
I don't use Linux, so it doesn't much matter to me if it uses proprietary drivers or not. But I do use FreeBSD which has a proprietary driver or two available for it. My answer based on my FreeBSD experience is: "NO FSCKING WAY!"
There are many advantages to Open Source software, and to me, being fully in control of your computer is one of them. But when I used the NVidia driver I was not in control. When it was first announced I was in the process of building a new PC. On the basis of NVidia officially supporting FreeBSD, I decided on a GeForce card to show my reciprocal support. For a few months I was happy. Then the proprietary nature of the driver rose up and bit me. When a new FreeBSD CD set arrived on my doorstep via my subscription, I wasn't able to use it until NVidia updated their driver.
The last straw came when after SIX MONTHS of no updates, I went searching around for reasons. It turned out that NVidia had decided not to update the driver because they were tired of tracking an evolving kernel. They weren't going to release a new Binary Blob(tm) until the 5.x branch was declared stable. While that might make sense on the surface, how come none of the Open Source XFree86/X.org drivers had the same issue? How come none of the Open Source DRI drivers in FreeBSD had the same issue? This was especially painful because the driver KEPT CRASHING the kernel! In twenty five years of using Unix, BSD and Linux, this has been the only time I have seen a kernel crash.
I went to the store and bought a low end Radeon. I am using the Open Source radeon driver, and couldn't be happier. It has never crashed on me, and I never have to wait for someone to get around to syncing it up with an OS upgrade. The transition from FreeBSD 5.x to 6.0 was painless, which is how it should be.
Keep the Binary Blobs(tm) out of my operating system!
I'm puzzled at the attitude the submitter apparently has, in that he seems to be describing environmentalists, and pro-nuke-power people, as two separate groups.
If I saw someone at an anti-war^H^H^HBush rally wearing Birkenstocks, ratty teeshirt, and a Greenpeace button, I would not hesitate in the least to wager $1000 that same person was also anti-nuke. No question about it. Liberals tend to be environmentalists and anti-nuke, while conservatives tend to be conservationists and pro-nuke.
This is what happens when you environmentalists encourage your fringe elements to be your spokesmen. Greenpeace is anti-nuke, Earthfirst is anti-nuke, everyone spiking trees is anti-nuke. Today you are saying you are environmentalist and pro-nuke, but where the hell where you ten, twenty, thirty years ago? The only reason we have these dirty radioactive coal plants still around is because environmentalists blocked nuclear power at every turn.
For me, Boot Camp simply means efficient work with one fewer laptops being paid for, maintained & carried around, while still being able to run at virtually native hardware speed...no more, no less.
That explains dual booting Windows. But it doesn't explain triplebooting, since OSX is already a Unix system with all the trimmings. You did say "efficient work," and so I assume this isn't for play. I'm racking my brain but I can't see the reason for a work laptop to be multiboooting more than one Unix system.
A desktop I can see. Playing around with it on a laptop I can see. But expecting your work to be more "efficient" because of it I cannot.
You quit for twelve years. Stop calling it a failure and congratulate yourself! You know you can do it, so I can only assume that by continuing you don't want to quit. That's okay by me.
I smoked for twenty five years, and everyone around me said I could not quit because it was more addictive than heroin. They said after twenty five years it was impossible. "Oh man," they said, "you'll never be able to quit!" BUT I DID! It sounds too simplistic to be true, but it is: to quit smoking you simply do not smoke any more.
I'm not saying this to belittle anyone, I'm saying it as encouragement. If you want to quit, you CAN quit.
This is why there are so many intolerant anti-smoking crusaders out there. "I did it, so you can".
I am emphatically NOT an "intolerant anti-smoking crusader." I hated them when I smoked and I vowed I would not become one when I quit. The only reason I posted was because the grandparent post expressed a desire to quit.
I said "simply quit", because I do believe it to be the easiest way. It may not work the first time, or the second, or even the third. But if the desire to quit is really there, it will eventually work. By "simply quit", I mean to make the firm decision to stop smoking. I do NOT mean that you tell yourself "I will try to quit this week and see how it goes." I do NOT mean that you tell yourself "I am quitting, but will keep a pack around just in case I fail." I mean that you must tell yourself "as of this date I no longer smoke cigarettes.".
Frankly, I don't care if other people quit or not. If some guy does not want to quit, it won't bother me. But if they do, then they need to quit. Really.
p.s. You don't help an addict by telling him they can't quit. I'm doing the opposite, I'm telling them they CAN quit.
Close, but not quite. I'm the opposite of ADHD. As a kid I could focus intently on one task for hours, oblivious to everything around me. And I didn't smoke as a kid:-) If smokers simply had untreated ADHD, then they would have had ADHD as kids before they learned to smoke.
But you are right in a way. Smoking did calm me down, and after I quit I felt really stupid for about a year because I couldn't focus well.
As someone who quit smoking two years ago, let me tell you the easiest way to do it: just do it! It's that simple. There are things that will help, but the core of it is to simply stop.
I woke up one day and said "I'm going to quit next monday." I spent that week tapering off somewhat, and used the patch when I quit. I don't know how much of an effect the tapering and patch had, but they were isignificant compared to the effect of simply quitting.
b. Global warming (arc) is speeding up, tenfold in just the last five years
According to this article, we've actually leveled off. Maybe Prince Charles' idea of banning hairspray actually worked!
When you make the existance of a problem part of your world view, you're unable to realize when the problem is being solved. This goes not just for global warming, but for pollution, poverty, child nutrition, etc. We still have some problems in these areas, to be sure, but the people with the doom-and-gloom worldview will not admit it.
Slashdot Mirror
There was no courage in this. People have been lampooning presidents since the first joke about wooden teeth. It doesn't take big brassy balls to do this, just some bad jokes. Stop making this out to be some sort of heroic act.
I'm starting to get scared about how unbalanced some of you people are. Some comic makes fun of the president to his face and you wet your pants in glee. The attention this story is getting is disturbing.
Not nearly as tacky as someone who can't play the bugle.
In twenty five years of computing, twenty of it online in some form or antoher, I have never once had any sort of malware infect my systems. No viruses, no worms, no trojans, no spyware, no adware. Never. Neither have I had the clap.
People are apathetic because they know the "indignation" is pure partisanship. Where was Mr. Specter during the Clinton years? Where was ANY of the left during the Clinton years? There's nothing the Bush administration is doing that the Clinton administration didn't do first in some form. He might have turned a blind eye to terrorism, but he certainly was tapping phone without specific warrants.
I'm not defending Bush, I'm condemning today's spineless liberals who give a free pass to anything a liberal politician does. People are apathetic because you treat good and evil like it was a game.
No, the point is that sites for free screensavers, games, and lyrics are all full of spyware.
It's like saying users can't tell which scraggy whore has the clap, so they should all buy new McAfee Anti-Itch cream so they can keep on screwing scraggy whores with the clap. If you compare users with the clap to users without the clap, you notice a strong correlation to choice of partner.
For piercings, get some plain studs for the interview. For the tattoos, wear a long sleeve shirt. If your tattoos are bold and obnoxious, you may need to resign yourself that you made a bad choice.
After you get interviewed, things may change. The rule for ANY job is not make waves. If everyone wears a suit and tie, then you're going to have to wear a suit and tie. The dress codes for most IT and engineering departments is casual, so you probably won't have to. I wear teeshirts and jeans, and only shave every other day. Moderate hoop earrings would not be a problem at my work. If the dress code is a concern for you, then ask at the interview, or ask for a tour of the building(s) and see what everyone is wearing.
Jeezus I wish I could find hiring managers like you guys.
No, you just need to learn how to get a job. Life isn't fair, and one of the unfair things about it is that it's "who you know, not what you know." So start knowing people. Start networking. Start joining organizations. Even if you don't know anyone at the company, a bit of research may get you the name of someone in the IT or engineering department you can send your resume to instead.
The HR rep at my current job didn't want to hire me, but fortunately I knew a couple of people there, and did an end run around that asshole. This is commonplace. The reason we old farts have an advantage over you younglings is that we know more people.
Also, you need to learn to sell yourself. That means knowing salesmanship. If you get stuck with an HR puke, stop selling to get hired (because their job is to NOT hire you), and start selling to get a second interview with someone clueful. Be positive, use a firm handshake, don't stammer, etc. Get a haircut and wear a tie. For someone right out of university indoctrination, it sounds corny, but it's how the real world works.
Having been on the receiving end of my resume being sent to the trash bin, regardless of experience, simply because I did not have that degree that you are mocking shows me that you are being a bit misleading.
I'm not knocking your degree. In fact, I don't have a CS/CE degree. Heck, I don't even an 'S' in my degree. I'm a literature major! My point is, if you want to be hired for a skilled position, you need to demonstrate that you have the skills.
The world is different today than fifty years ago. College has become like high school. Everyone has a degree, so degrees are nothing special. That piece of paper is no longer a free ticket for a job.
...but new CSEE graduates who had a 3.0 or better GPA are usually at least trainable.
That's pretty much what we're looking for, someone who is worthwhile enough to waste a year bringing up to speed.
The starting salary only applies for those graduates who get jobs in the first place.
Having recently interviewed several candidates on campus, I'm starting to see why they're not getting hired. Most are unmotivated, but a lack of income will soon fix that. The real problem is that they don't have any real world skills. A university CS/CE graduate should either have enough hand-on programming experience to know which end of a compiler goes up, or enough theoretical knowledge to know the difference between the basic data structures. I'm not getting that from the candidates I'm interviewing.
Unless the universities straighten up, I think the future of university graduates is an extra year at DeVry/ITT just to get the skills to be employable.
Except for DRM, that is. How in the world am I going to play a downloaded video without a Microsoft brand player?
Is it that hard to understand that the majority of the world still uses office 97 or 2000?
No it's not hard to understand. But so what? Are you suggesting that Apple flush OSX down the toilet and ship Windows instead because that's what the majority of the world uses?
What you people don't understand is that Apple doesn't have to get a 100% market share in order to succeed. It's a success TODAY with a mere 5% share. IBM did what you suggested, and had 110% Windows compatibility, shipped all their systems with Windows, etc., and they LOST the desktop. Apple never did any of that, and they're still on the desktop going strong and gaining new customers every day.
If Linux systems ever want to develop greater market penetration and actually challenge the dominance of Windows...
If that were the goal, you would be correct. But let me clue you in on something. Torvald's motto of "world domination", is a joke! He isn't being serious! I'm sorry you didn't understand this before, but now you do.
Some people use Linux (and other Free operating systems) precisely because they are free and unencumbered. To hostage them to a proprietary driver is nonsense. We're not talking about some end user application, we're talking about the kernel itself. There had damned well be a better reason than market penetration to do so.
I don't believe in paying license fees to begin with, so there!
At the same time I'm not an enviromentalist by any stretch (e.g. if my girlfriend didn't force me to I wouldn't recycle anything) and I'm very much pro-nuke. Hell, I'm largely a lassiez-faire capitalist.
As someone who lives in the San Fransisco Bay Area, let me warn you that people like you are not wanted. The SFBA is the capital of tolerance, and will tolerate anything... except disagreement.
Admittedly I'm a libertarian
OMG! The only thing stopping San Fransisco from publicly beheading libertarians is the lack of a guillotine!
I don't use Linux, so it doesn't much matter to me if it uses proprietary drivers or not. But I do use FreeBSD which has a proprietary driver or two available for it. My answer based on my FreeBSD experience is: "NO FSCKING WAY!"
There are many advantages to Open Source software, and to me, being fully in control of your computer is one of them. But when I used the NVidia driver I was not in control. When it was first announced I was in the process of building a new PC. On the basis of NVidia officially supporting FreeBSD, I decided on a GeForce card to show my reciprocal support. For a few months I was happy. Then the proprietary nature of the driver rose up and bit me. When a new FreeBSD CD set arrived on my doorstep via my subscription, I wasn't able to use it until NVidia updated their driver.
The last straw came when after SIX MONTHS of no updates, I went searching around for reasons. It turned out that NVidia had decided not to update the driver because they were tired of tracking an evolving kernel. They weren't going to release a new Binary Blob(tm) until the 5.x branch was declared stable. While that might make sense on the surface, how come none of the Open Source XFree86/X.org drivers had the same issue? How come none of the Open Source DRI drivers in FreeBSD had the same issue? This was especially painful because the driver KEPT CRASHING the kernel! In twenty five years of using Unix, BSD and Linux, this has been the only time I have seen a kernel crash.
I went to the store and bought a low end Radeon. I am using the Open Source radeon driver, and couldn't be happier. It has never crashed on me, and I never have to wait for someone to get around to syncing it up with an OS upgrade. The transition from FreeBSD 5.x to 6.0 was painless, which is how it should be.
Keep the Binary Blobs(tm) out of my operating system!
I'm puzzled at the attitude the submitter apparently has, in that he seems to be describing environmentalists, and pro-nuke-power people, as two separate groups.
If I saw someone at an anti-war^H^H^HBush rally wearing Birkenstocks, ratty teeshirt, and a Greenpeace button, I would not hesitate in the least to wager $1000 that same person was also anti-nuke. No question about it. Liberals tend to be environmentalists and anti-nuke, while conservatives tend to be conservationists and pro-nuke.
This is what happens when you environmentalists encourage your fringe elements to be your spokesmen. Greenpeace is anti-nuke, Earthfirst is anti-nuke, everyone spiking trees is anti-nuke. Today you are saying you are environmentalist and pro-nuke, but where the hell where you ten, twenty, thirty years ago? The only reason we have these dirty radioactive coal plants still around is because environmentalists blocked nuclear power at every turn.
It's a simple practical consideration, not some conspiracy.
Everything is a conspiracy to most people on Slashdot.
For me, Boot Camp simply means efficient work with one fewer laptops being paid for, maintained & carried around, while still being able to run at virtually native hardware speed...no more, no less.
That explains dual booting Windows. But it doesn't explain triplebooting, since OSX is already a Unix system with all the trimmings. You did say "efficient work," and so I assume this isn't for play. I'm racking my brain but I can't see the reason for a work laptop to be multiboooting more than one Unix system.
A desktop I can see. Playing around with it on a laptop I can see. But expecting your work to be more "efficient" because of it I cannot.
You quit for twelve years. Stop calling it a failure and congratulate yourself! You know you can do it, so I can only assume that by continuing you don't want to quit. That's okay by me.
I smoked for twenty five years, and everyone around me said I could not quit because it was more addictive than heroin. They said after twenty five years it was impossible. "Oh man," they said, "you'll never be able to quit!" BUT I DID! It sounds too simplistic to be true, but it is: to quit smoking you simply do not smoke any more.
I'm not saying this to belittle anyone, I'm saying it as encouragement. If you want to quit, you CAN quit.
This is why there are so many intolerant anti-smoking crusaders out there. "I did it, so you can".
I am emphatically NOT an "intolerant anti-smoking crusader." I hated them when I smoked and I vowed I would not become one when I quit. The only reason I posted was because the grandparent post expressed a desire to quit.
I said "simply quit", because I do believe it to be the easiest way. It may not work the first time, or the second, or even the third. But if the desire to quit is really there, it will eventually work. By "simply quit", I mean to make the firm decision to stop smoking. I do NOT mean that you tell yourself "I will try to quit this week and see how it goes." I do NOT mean that you tell yourself "I am quitting, but will keep a pack around just in case I fail." I mean that you must tell yourself "as of this date I no longer smoke cigarettes.".
Frankly, I don't care if other people quit or not. If some guy does not want to quit, it won't bother me. But if they do, then they need to quit. Really.
p.s. You don't help an addict by telling him they can't quit. I'm doing the opposite, I'm telling them they CAN quit.
Close, but not quite. I'm the opposite of ADHD. As a kid I could focus intently on one task for hours, oblivious to everything around me. And I didn't smoke as a kid :-) If smokers simply had untreated ADHD, then they would have had ADHD as kids before they learned to smoke.
But you are right in a way. Smoking did calm me down, and after I quit I felt really stupid for about a year because I couldn't focus well.
As someone who quit smoking two years ago, let me tell you the easiest way to do it: just do it! It's that simple. There are things that will help, but the core of it is to simply stop.
I woke up one day and said "I'm going to quit next monday." I spent that week tapering off somewhat, and used the patch when I quit. I don't know how much of an effect the tapering and patch had, but they were isignificant compared to the effect of simply quitting.
b. Global warming (arc) is speeding up, tenfold in just the last five years
According to this article, we've actually leveled off. Maybe Prince Charles' idea of banning hairspray actually worked!
When you make the existance of a problem part of your world view, you're unable to realize when the problem is being solved. This goes not just for global warming, but for pollution, poverty, child nutrition, etc. We still have some problems in these areas, to be sure, but the people with the doom-and-gloom worldview will not admit it.
This isn't a problem with homeland security, it's a problem for 90% of IT departments out there.