If nobody passes the test, then it seems to me that the problem is with the test, not the people.
Too afraid to tell people they're stupid? No, it's not you fault. We're expecting too much. It's thinking like this that leads to grade inflation, and ultimately to even the most mundane of jobs requiring a college degree.
Maybe this wouldn't bother me if going to college didn't cost thousands of dollars. Plus I love the idea of spending four years of my life studying to get a piece of paper to be taken seriously for a job I could have done while still in high school.
Gasoline engines do not work when submerged. They require high voltage electrical sparks to ignite the fuel. Being submerged robs them of the spark they need to run. You would have to do special waterproofing of all of the engine's electrical works before it can run submerged.
If only we had the technology to do such waterproofing and run high voltage electrical wires underwater... Oh wait, we do. Which means it is possible to run a gasoline engine submerged then, doesn't it? It's just that you can't grab any engine from a standard passenger car as it was built from the factory and do it.
It's not just Facebook. Have you tried contacting Netflix or Google? It's nearly impossible, and they never respond. Even Twitter went downhill quickly in the user-responsiveness category. It's pretty amazing how unresponsive most major internet-based companies are; the only good ones I can think of are retailers or ISPs.
So the businesses where people are paying the company for a product or service? I wonder if there's a correlation here...
There are many ways of learning that don't involve spending thousands of dollars.
In my experience knowing something is worthless in the job market unless you have a piece of paper showing you spent thousands of dollars to learn it, and even then actually knowing what you have your degree in isn't even really required.
This article is another dribbling piece of FUD. Amazon can say what it likes in its contracts and TOS agreements, but its words, no matter how much legalise they use, cannot deactivate general legal rights. If an individual rents a textbook, that individual is free to travel wherever they like in the USA without potential penalty.
They only lose the game if someone plays against them. For most people, paying the purchase price for the book because of the "violation" is going to be cheaper than hiring a lawyer. So guess who wins.
I did say I needed to give notice, and the response was they didn't know if the job would still be available that far out.
It's very telling that job applications all want you to give a specific date you're available to work. If I'm currently employed, I don't have a date I can give them, since it's a moving target. The date I'm available is going to be two weeks from whenever I can give notice with my current job, which wont be until after I've been contacted back, interviewed (perhaps multiple times), and finally offered the position by the company.
I think if you don't give notice then it raises red flags for your new employer. You could tell your new employer you'll start in two weeks, then tell your current employer to eff off, and then take two weeks for yourself (unpaid). But industries are so small that why would you want to burn bridges?
I find that employers are big hippocrits. They like people who are available immediately and want you to start soon after they hire you, even when they know you're currently employed (and today, it's hard to get a job if you're not currently employed when you're applying), but still expect you to give two weeks notice when you leave them though.
ESPN is crap i get for FREE in my cable package.. There's no way to not have it and have anything else to watch. (channels i want)
Espn and espn2 are in the garbage tiers like the shopping channels. They cram that stuff onto everyone here.
How are they free if you're paying for a base cable package to get them?
More like "ESPN worked out this sweet deal where the cablecos have to pay them for every subscriber they have regardless of if that subscriber wants ESPN or not, by virture of requiring in their contract the station be on the 'basic' cable package."
That's a lot closer to the truth I bet, and the kind of crap NFL Network I know does. Which is why there are some pay-TV providers that don't carry NFL Network, they wont agree to that type of contract because the demand for the station in their markets is simply not high enough for the cost. ESPN is an easier deal to take because it has a broader appeal than a premium single-sport network and a much longer track record from being an older network.
If you put a stop to social networking sites by design that's less likely to happen. People will move back to forms of communication that existed before Facebook. There was a web and sharing of news before those sites existed, remember?
And the result will be people communicating with methods that are more private by default. Like email and IM. That will reduce the public dissemination of the information, what the idea was all along.
The point is they're more likely to come to a conclusion that's much worse.
Like they be given a direct backdoor to the whole system so they can go in and edit anything at will if they need to remove information terrorists might make use of. Like requiring automatic censorship software be installed they can use to define terms and phrases that will automatically notify them or change the content for them.
This will inevitably have a scope creep where you just plain can't talk about some things the government doesn't like on social networking sites, so more erosion of First Amendment rights under the rule of "National Security" put to the test in farce "secret courts".
Forget the "derivative work" business, you're taking a picture of the text with a cellphone. That's unauthorized reproduction, just as people are always getting warned about making photocopies of book sections.
Does this mean that we could run the Adobe suite on Linux? Maybe Dreamweaver as well? Or is this a hopeless dream. Anything is better than having to use the Mac OSX Finder.
IIRC, Photoshop at least still uses Carbon to run. This is why Adobe threw such a big fit when Apple originally talked about not taking Carbon 64-bit and expecting everyone to transition to Cocoa.
Now that he's made the comment, look to see who starts acting shifty and collecting stuff to leak. They're the people you can't trust, and the ones who will get fired (or worse).
>Protip - a few years ago I was talking to the then-head of the Navy's then-nascent cybersecurity team (soon to become one or two battalions). He said that their red-team tests showed that the average cost to buy your way into a Fortune 500 company's data center was $7500. If nothing else, Snowden showed that it may cost nothing at all.
In Snowden Revolution, Fortune 500 company pays YOU, to infiltrate their data center.
That is asinine for a single user, not to mention a non-starter when it comes to configuring the 1,000+ machines I support.
While I personally don't want the tab bar visible all the time either, I guess I don't see how it's mission-critical that it not be visible on the systems you support. Yes, it's a change. But it's not something that's going to turn your users into basketcases.
If you're deploying Firefox ESR you're not even going to be seeing these changes on your supported machines for some time.
Slashdot Mirror
I feel like I'm reading a disguised form of the "It's the white man's fault. They're holding me down!" excuse.
If nobody passes the test, then it seems to me that the problem is with the test, not the people.
Too afraid to tell people they're stupid? No, it's not you fault. We're expecting too much.
It's thinking like this that leads to grade inflation, and ultimately to even the most mundane of jobs requiring a college degree.
Maybe this wouldn't bother me if going to college didn't cost thousands of dollars.
Plus I love the idea of spending four years of my life studying to get a piece of paper to be taken seriously for a job I could have done while still in high school.
The only special thing about this one is the specs and it's running Android.
Is this commercial break almost over?
Recently Closed Tabs not "without a keyboard" enough for you?
Hold on... I think we've hit on something patentable.
His ID is seven digits, not eight. But I still agree with your sentiment.
I'd hate to see the aftermath of folding this car up if you forgot that you had left a couple of six-packs in the back.
I'd hate to see the aftermath of a side-impact collision. No protection at all with those little flaps for doors.
Gasoline engines do not work when submerged. They require high voltage electrical sparks to ignite the fuel. Being submerged robs them of the spark they need to run. You would have to do special waterproofing of all of the engine's electrical works before it can run submerged.
If only we had the technology to do such waterproofing and run high voltage electrical wires underwater...
Oh wait, we do. Which means it is possible to run a gasoline engine submerged then, doesn't it?
It's just that you can't grab any engine from a standard passenger car as it was built from the factory and do it.
It's not just Facebook. Have you tried contacting Netflix or Google? It's nearly impossible, and they never respond. Even Twitter went downhill quickly in the user-responsiveness category. It's pretty amazing how unresponsive most major internet-based companies are; the only good ones I can think of are retailers or ISPs.
So the businesses where people are paying the company for a product or service?
I wonder if there's a correlation here...
There are many ways of learning that don't involve spending thousands of dollars.
In my experience knowing something is worthless in the job market unless you have a piece of paper showing you spent thousands of dollars to learn it, and even then actually knowing what you have your degree in isn't even really required.
This article is another dribbling piece of FUD. Amazon can say what it likes in its contracts and TOS agreements, but its words, no matter how much legalise they use, cannot deactivate general legal rights. If an individual rents a textbook, that individual is free to travel wherever they like in the USA without potential penalty.
They only lose the game if someone plays against them.
For most people, paying the purchase price for the book because of the "violation" is going to be cheaper than hiring a lawyer.
So guess who wins.
Or can only wealthy corporations skirt the law because things are "too hard"?
Yes.
I did say I needed to give notice, and the response was they didn't know if the job would still be available that far out.
It's very telling that job applications all want you to give a specific date you're available to work. If I'm currently employed, I don't have a date I can give them, since it's a moving target. The date I'm available is going to be two weeks from whenever I can give notice with my current job, which wont be until after I've been contacted back, interviewed (perhaps multiple times), and finally offered the position by the company.
I think if you don't give notice then it raises red flags for your new employer. You could tell your new employer you'll start in two weeks, then tell your current employer to eff off, and then take two weeks for yourself (unpaid). But industries are so small that why would you want to burn bridges?
I find that employers are big hippocrits. They like people who are available immediately and want you to start soon after they hire you, even when they know you're currently employed (and today, it's hard to get a job if you're not currently employed when you're applying), but still expect you to give two weeks notice when you leave them though.
ESPN is crap i get for FREE in my cable package.. There's no way to not have it and have anything else to watch. (channels i want)
Espn and espn2 are in the garbage tiers like the shopping channels. They cram that stuff onto everyone here.
How are they free if you're paying for a base cable package to get them?
More like "ESPN worked out this sweet deal where the cablecos have to pay them for every subscriber they have regardless of if that subscriber wants ESPN or not, by virture of requiring in their contract the station be on the 'basic' cable package."
That's a lot closer to the truth I bet, and the kind of crap NFL Network I know does. Which is why there are some pay-TV providers that don't carry NFL Network, they wont agree to that type of contract because the demand for the station in their markets is simply not high enough for the cost. ESPN is an easier deal to take because it has a broader appeal than a premium single-sport network and a much longer track record from being an older network.
If you put a stop to social networking sites by design that's less likely to happen. People will move back to forms of communication that existed before Facebook. There was a web and sharing of news before those sites existed, remember?
And the result will be people communicating with methods that are more private by default. Like email and IM.
That will reduce the public dissemination of the information, what the idea was all along.
The point is they're more likely to come to a conclusion that's much worse.
Like they be given a direct backdoor to the whole system so they can go in and edit anything at will if they need to remove information terrorists might make use of.
Like requiring automatic censorship software be installed they can use to define terms and phrases that will automatically notify them or change the content for them.
This will inevitably have a scope creep where you just plain can't talk about some things the government doesn't like on social networking sites, so more erosion of First Amendment rights under the rule of "National Security" put to the test in farce "secret courts".
Is the government declaring Facebook a national security threat because of all the information people post on it, and having it shut down.
Forget the "derivative work" business, you're taking a picture of the text with a cellphone. That's unauthorized reproduction, just as people are always getting warned about making photocopies of book sections.
Does this mean that we could run the Adobe suite on Linux? Maybe Dreamweaver as well? Or is this a hopeless dream. Anything is better than having to use the Mac OSX Finder.
IIRC, Photoshop at least still uses Carbon to run. This is why Adobe threw such a big fit when Apple originally talked about not taking Carbon 64-bit and expecting everyone to transition to Cocoa.
Seriously? I hate being one of those gramar nazi's, but....does anyone even proof read these submissions?
Moreso than you do.
Try this:
Seriously? I hate being one of those Grammar Nazis. But, does anyone even proofread these submissions?
Maybe it's part of a sting.
Now that he's made the comment, look to see who starts acting shifty and collecting stuff to leak.
They're the people you can't trust, and the ones who will get fired (or worse).
>Protip - a few years ago I was talking to the then-head of the Navy's then-nascent cybersecurity team (soon to become one or two battalions). He said that their red-team tests showed that the average cost to buy your way into a Fortune 500 company's data center was $7500. If nothing else, Snowden showed that it may cost nothing at all.
In Snowden Revolution, Fortune 500 company pays YOU, to infiltrate their data center.
Once the patches stop and they all get infected, they'll be so busy sending junk to each other that they won't have time to compute anything.
So lots of spam will be coming from computers in China? /sarcasm
That will be a big change.
That is asinine for a single user, not to mention a non-starter when it comes to configuring the 1,000+ machines I support.
While I personally don't want the tab bar visible all the time either, I guess I don't see how it's mission-critical that it not be visible on the systems you support. Yes, it's a change. But it's not something that's going to turn your users into basketcases.
If you're deploying Firefox ESR you're not even going to be seeing these changes on your supported machines for some time.
Ironically, you can still turn image loading on/off yourself easily from Internet Explorer
(Advanced tab of Internet Options, Multimedia section, "Show Pictures" checkbox)
Very same place it's been since IE 2.0 I believe.