Anyone who says certifications are pointless has never tried getting a job in a fortune 500 company. Good luck getting your resume past HR contractors who have been told to look for those certifications.
If you're not sure, put them through a gauntlet. Have them subnet a network. Give them a machine in pieces and have them re-assemble it. Ask some hypotheticals, how would they a) handle the cradle-to-grave lifespan of a hardware deployment, b) handle a downed server, c) harden a windows server (lol). Ask them to provide some scripting or code samples and ask them to walk you through them. You want a server admin, so try to keep it practical.
That's not always true. Some certifications are damn hard to fake it on - like the RHCE for example (not that this will help the sysop in question, but still).
Or when ionization prevents microwave transmission. Or when a blizzard causes a MAC truck to plow into a datacenter. Or when a lightning strike starts a fire in a telephony colocation center.
Actually I couldn't find anything showing particularly WHAT their metric is based off of, of at least not from the abstract. It doesn't actually mention their testing methodology, to quote: "Participants were members of the Dunedin Study, a prospective study of a birth cohort of 1,037 individuals followed from birth (1972/1973) to age 38 y. Cannabis use was ascertained in interviews at ages 18, 21, 26, 32, and 38 y. Neuropsychological testing was conducted at age 13 y, before initiation of cannabis use, and again at age 38 y, after a pattern of persistent cannabis use had developed." The abstract states that they were participants in the Dunedin longitudinal study which means they may not really be controlling for much of anything. So, really what they're saying is that there is some correlation.
Sadly there are a ton of things referred to as abomination: eating lobster, homosexuality, wearing two types of cloth, rotating crops, the list goes on and on. Those evil ruffians!
I'd disagree that it'd work on linux as well. The SSN info would have been gotten to, but any remote execution applications most likely wouldn't be binary compatible.
That sucks, we often make mistakes when we were younger. I didn't start until after 18, but they're saying it is the developing brain which is impacted and AFAIK the brain is in active development through the end of puberty, which would be the early 20's. The legal cutoff of 18 doesn't really match biological development. One thing to note about that study from wired is that the doses were extremely heavy to see the memory benefits (think along the lines of taking marinol daily, every day, significantly more than what you're average smoker would ingest). As I said, I can't help but wonder if there are non-chemical impacts in play here. Most of the researchers are experts in social psych, and everything is based on self-reports so it's not like they're slicing up brains and finding weird plaques on neurons. I'm wondering what potential confounds or correlating factors could be since it's not like they can control for much of anything given their methodology as shown in the abstract.
Wow, lots of AC's posting with no actual relevant discussion of the topic. I wish someone had the full study listed since the abstract doesn't mention any controls. It's pretty well established that IQ's can vary ~10 degrees in either direction throughout life from a baseline taken early on based on any number of factors, from physical activity to constant mental engagement (I know in PA they do initial IQ tests around 1st grade to get the baseline). I wonder if those factors are what is affected, vs a direct impact from exposure to cannabinoids (no one in the study seems to be the slice-and-dice-the-brain type, and everything is based on self-reporting).
I wonder how this reconciles with the evidence that heavy marijuana use actually helps improve longterm memory formation (http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/11/marijuana-could/). I guess while you have a better long term memory, your ability to do logic and linguistical analysis drops. Interesting trade off. I know that IQ's tend to vary 10-15 points in either direction during life based on any number of factors (at least that's what they told me when I was a kid), so I wonder if that is what is being impacted on, as opposed to a direct effect of the cannabinoids.
Also, as someone who has smoked since they were 18 (stopped about a year ago, around 10 years) I don't feel any dumber, and my IQ score is still in the 150's, so for me it actually went up a few points (tested in the upper 140's in elementary school), so in my particular case it may not be the best. I wonder if there are environmental confounds in the study - perhaps a bunch of folks got stoned and watched game shows all day which is enough to dumb down most people? Anecdotally I usually would smoke and go for walks, hikes, bike rides, explore nature, read, or watch discovery channel - things which kept me active. Anyone have a link to the full study? I'd like to see their methodology.
I like my macbook, I grabbed one of the late 2011 models, and promptly ripped it apart. It's now running dual hard disks (1 SSD, 1 1TB 7200 RPM), 16GB RAM, it has a user replaceable battery, and I can find spare parts for all of the internals. It's about as user upgradable as I could want from a laptop. Honestly if this died, I'd probably just get another one.
I mean, are there really any whizbang features for laptops and desktops that really force you to upgrade? Outside of professional computing, do I really need 1024 cores or whatever we'll have in 5 years that will warrant NEEDING to upgrade? I mean, frankly, 1 core is all you need for checking email, browsing facebook, and watching porn.
I think you misunderstand how definitions work. Ask the average person what a hacker is. You and I know it originally meant someone who could find creative solutions to problems. But the fact is it simply doesn't mean that anymore. Words mean what the population feels that they mean. Or would you prefer all of us geeks go back to biting the heads off of chickens?
My concern isn't an average end user. My concern is IT having to herd cats when they push out this upgrade in the future. No one is going to be getting a "fresh" install in a corporate environment, users will be getting a clone pushed to their desktop with apps, settings, and more installed already. It is possible that sysprep will show the helper hints, its possible that it won't. If it does, I'm concerned users will just click through them without looking, like they always do. Further, what about on a sales floor? Will they install freshly after every single customer uses the machine so everyone can see the tooltips? I doubt it. I will say when I tried 8 in a VM (this could be part of the reason for my negative experience), I could get to the desktop, and pretty much no where else. After a few minutes I killed the VM and said to heck with it. My experience matched his dad's, and that was a fresh install.
That is incorrect. The correct street term for MDMA is "molly." I think, if you actually spoke to the community of users, no one had any illusions that MDMA was often absent entirely from whatever pills were available. In fact, that is why large databases of pill assays were posted online specifically so people could see what the contents of particular ecstasy tablets were. You could find out what someone was offering as ecstasy, look up the assay, and decide to purchase. Originally, yes, ecstasy was MDMA. However it not longer is that way - the definition has changed, and the market knows it. The market knows specifically that if you are looking for pure MDMA, the thing you're looking for is referred to as Molly.
Honestly I agree with you. If I hadn't joined this conversation so late I'd have tried to link this on its own, but it still pertains. Here's a video of an actual user's experience with windows 8 metro: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4boTbv9_nU. I'm pretty sure your calling it a hindrance is 100% correct. We are looking at a nightmare if average users are ever forced to upgrade simply because it is NOT easy to figure out. The "apple" intuitiveness isn't there. At least before things mostly made sense with windows. That means for organizations like mine where we have several hundred thousand users, that translates to several hundred thousand support calls. Several hundred thousand support tickets opened at the same time. All so microsoft can try and force people to use a new UI. I understand why they're doing it, but I absolutely disagree with how they're doing it. Hopefully there can at least be domain policies to completely remove metro UI.
Not to be semantic, but while all MDMA is ecstasy, not all ecstasy is MDMA. Merck synthesized MDMA it in 1912 and didn't do anything with it until the 1960's when they started using it for couples therapy (and it was one hell of a great aid since it let couples truly understand one another instead of fighting right away - sadly too much potential for abuse). After it went off the radar, people started synthesizing it (to my knowledge it's not actually that hard, but still helps to be an organic chemist) and often ended up with MDA, MDB, and any number of other adulterants like cocaine, caffeine, and meth. So I think the better question is whether or not "MDMA" was available, not ecstasy, since it's basically a catch all for any number of fun colored small pills containing a cocktail of assorted chemicals.
Greets all. So our company creates a browser toolbar for VoIP customers to allow them to use click-to-call features, show presence, etc. We gave up on trying to work with mozilla because of the fact that once a week, the browser would be outdated and all of our build work would be for naught. It's annoying to try and keep up with it when other browsers at least keep a fairly stable platform to build on.
Slashdot Mirror
Wait... they make GUI's for linux...? Not for my red hat servers they don't! ;)
Anyone who says certifications are pointless has never tried getting a job in a fortune 500 company. Good luck getting your resume past HR contractors who have been told to look for those certifications.
Actually, both are correct. Subnetting is doing the math, making a subnet is putting it on a router interface.
If you're not sure, put them through a gauntlet. Have them subnet a network. Give them a machine in pieces and have them re-assemble it. Ask some hypotheticals, how would they a) handle the cradle-to-grave lifespan of a hardware deployment, b) handle a downed server, c) harden a windows server (lol). Ask them to provide some scripting or code samples and ask them to walk you through them. You want a server admin, so try to keep it practical.
That's not always true. Some certifications are damn hard to fake it on - like the RHCE for example (not that this will help the sysop in question, but still).
Or when ionization prevents microwave transmission. Or when a blizzard causes a MAC truck to plow into a datacenter. Or when a lightning strike starts a fire in a telephony colocation center.
Actually I couldn't find anything showing particularly WHAT their metric is based off of, of at least not from the abstract. It doesn't actually mention their testing methodology, to quote: "Participants were members of the Dunedin Study, a prospective study of a birth cohort of 1,037 individuals followed from birth (1972/1973) to age 38 y. Cannabis use was ascertained in interviews at ages 18, 21, 26, 32, and 38 y. Neuropsychological testing was conducted at age 13 y, before initiation of cannabis use, and again at age 38 y, after a pattern of persistent cannabis use had developed." The abstract states that they were participants in the Dunedin longitudinal study which means they may not really be controlling for much of anything. So, really what they're saying is that there is some correlation.
Sadly there are a ton of things referred to as abomination: eating lobster, homosexuality, wearing two types of cloth, rotating crops, the list goes on and on. Those evil ruffians!
Wow, America is eff'd.
Backup everything first. If you want to poke around first, make sure the damn thing is off the intertubes.
I'd disagree that it'd work on linux as well. The SSN info would have been gotten to, but any remote execution applications most likely wouldn't be binary compatible.
That sucks, we often make mistakes when we were younger. I didn't start until after 18, but they're saying it is the developing brain which is impacted and AFAIK the brain is in active development through the end of puberty, which would be the early 20's. The legal cutoff of 18 doesn't really match biological development. One thing to note about that study from wired is that the doses were extremely heavy to see the memory benefits (think along the lines of taking marinol daily, every day, significantly more than what you're average smoker would ingest). As I said, I can't help but wonder if there are non-chemical impacts in play here. Most of the researchers are experts in social psych, and everything is based on self-reports so it's not like they're slicing up brains and finding weird plaques on neurons. I'm wondering what potential confounds or correlating factors could be since it's not like they can control for much of anything given their methodology as shown in the abstract.
Wow, lots of AC's posting with no actual relevant discussion of the topic. I wish someone had the full study listed since the abstract doesn't mention any controls. It's pretty well established that IQ's can vary ~10 degrees in either direction throughout life from a baseline taken early on based on any number of factors, from physical activity to constant mental engagement (I know in PA they do initial IQ tests around 1st grade to get the baseline). I wonder if those factors are what is affected, vs a direct impact from exposure to cannabinoids (no one in the study seems to be the slice-and-dice-the-brain type, and everything is based on self-reporting).
I wonder how this reconciles with the evidence that heavy marijuana use actually helps improve longterm memory formation (http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/11/marijuana-could/). I guess while you have a better long term memory, your ability to do logic and linguistical analysis drops. Interesting trade off. I know that IQ's tend to vary 10-15 points in either direction during life based on any number of factors (at least that's what they told me when I was a kid), so I wonder if that is what is being impacted on, as opposed to a direct effect of the cannabinoids. Also, as someone who has smoked since they were 18 (stopped about a year ago, around 10 years) I don't feel any dumber, and my IQ score is still in the 150's, so for me it actually went up a few points (tested in the upper 140's in elementary school), so in my particular case it may not be the best. I wonder if there are environmental confounds in the study - perhaps a bunch of folks got stoned and watched game shows all day which is enough to dumb down most people? Anecdotally I usually would smoke and go for walks, hikes, bike rides, explore nature, read, or watch discovery channel - things which kept me active. Anyone have a link to the full study? I'd like to see their methodology.
I like my macbook, I grabbed one of the late 2011 models, and promptly ripped it apart. It's now running dual hard disks (1 SSD, 1 1TB 7200 RPM), 16GB RAM, it has a user replaceable battery, and I can find spare parts for all of the internals. It's about as user upgradable as I could want from a laptop. Honestly if this died, I'd probably just get another one. I mean, are there really any whizbang features for laptops and desktops that really force you to upgrade? Outside of professional computing, do I really need 1024 cores or whatever we'll have in 5 years that will warrant NEEDING to upgrade? I mean, frankly, 1 core is all you need for checking email, browsing facebook, and watching porn.
If they clearly state "as long as we exist" as one of the selling points, then I don't think that they can wrangle out of it quite that easily.
Seriously though, for that amount your best bet is to take them to small claims court.
I think you misunderstand how definitions work. Ask the average person what a hacker is. You and I know it originally meant someone who could find creative solutions to problems. But the fact is it simply doesn't mean that anymore. Words mean what the population feels that they mean. Or would you prefer all of us geeks go back to biting the heads off of chickens?
My concern isn't an average end user. My concern is IT having to herd cats when they push out this upgrade in the future. No one is going to be getting a "fresh" install in a corporate environment, users will be getting a clone pushed to their desktop with apps, settings, and more installed already. It is possible that sysprep will show the helper hints, its possible that it won't. If it does, I'm concerned users will just click through them without looking, like they always do. Further, what about on a sales floor? Will they install freshly after every single customer uses the machine so everyone can see the tooltips? I doubt it. I will say when I tried 8 in a VM (this could be part of the reason for my negative experience), I could get to the desktop, and pretty much no where else. After a few minutes I killed the VM and said to heck with it. My experience matched his dad's, and that was a fresh install.
That is incorrect. The correct street term for MDMA is "molly." I think, if you actually spoke to the community of users, no one had any illusions that MDMA was often absent entirely from whatever pills were available. In fact, that is why large databases of pill assays were posted online specifically so people could see what the contents of particular ecstasy tablets were. You could find out what someone was offering as ecstasy, look up the assay, and decide to purchase. Originally, yes, ecstasy was MDMA. However it not longer is that way - the definition has changed, and the market knows it. The market knows specifically that if you are looking for pure MDMA, the thing you're looking for is referred to as Molly.
Honestly I agree with you. If I hadn't joined this conversation so late I'd have tried to link this on its own, but it still pertains. Here's a video of an actual user's experience with windows 8 metro: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4boTbv9_nU. I'm pretty sure your calling it a hindrance is 100% correct. We are looking at a nightmare if average users are ever forced to upgrade simply because it is NOT easy to figure out. The "apple" intuitiveness isn't there. At least before things mostly made sense with windows. That means for organizations like mine where we have several hundred thousand users, that translates to several hundred thousand support calls. Several hundred thousand support tickets opened at the same time. All so microsoft can try and force people to use a new UI. I understand why they're doing it, but I absolutely disagree with how they're doing it. Hopefully there can at least be domain policies to completely remove metro UI.
I assume that that is similar to "Buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo!"?
However what if statistics show that alcohol is proportionally worse than another option? As they do in the case of cannabis.
Not to be semantic, but while all MDMA is ecstasy, not all ecstasy is MDMA. Merck synthesized MDMA it in 1912 and didn't do anything with it until the 1960's when they started using it for couples therapy (and it was one hell of a great aid since it let couples truly understand one another instead of fighting right away - sadly too much potential for abuse). After it went off the radar, people started synthesizing it (to my knowledge it's not actually that hard, but still helps to be an organic chemist) and often ended up with MDA, MDB, and any number of other adulterants like cocaine, caffeine, and meth. So I think the better question is whether or not "MDMA" was available, not ecstasy, since it's basically a catch all for any number of fun colored small pills containing a cocktail of assorted chemicals.
Greets all. So our company creates a browser toolbar for VoIP customers to allow them to use click-to-call features, show presence, etc. We gave up on trying to work with mozilla because of the fact that once a week, the browser would be outdated and all of our build work would be for naught. It's annoying to try and keep up with it when other browsers at least keep a fairly stable platform to build on.