I know lots of white people that would love to have a Job right now. *ANY* damn job. And can't because someone that doesn't have the right has it instead.
There are different languages because everyone thinks they can invent a better one. Java, if I remember correctly, was a commercial venture. To be fair, I started with Apple Basic, then moved on to Assembly, not knowing of C until much later. But I was 15 and didn't know any better.
All these other programming languages lower the entry requirements to being a programmer, and in the process reduce the overall quality of available software. It's got to be done by someone though, and there's just too much that still needs coding to go back and redo everything that's been done in.NET. Microsoft will take a major credibility hit if it's going to produce a language and make it obsolete with later versions like it does with Windows.
It makes sense under this context to stick to a few mature language such as C or C++. Fast, efficient ( If programmed correctly ) And won't require re-writing every 10 years or so.
If you want to talk the right language for the job then lets talk Perl, PHP for web apps, C, C++ for OS and desktop apps, etc etc etc. We don't need 100+ different languages to write with.
I can already do all these things Comcast is trying to sell, and it didn't take much for the customers employee's to destroy it all and go back to robbing the employer blind.
I can only imagine the fun consumers will have with this. Or the free tap Comcast may be giving the Govt...
I am flattered, if not a little alarmed that you took the time to visit my personal website. i shall have to fill it out more this weekend maybe. I am sorry you don't like Mormons. That doesn't make me weird. As for email, I would be an idiot to invite hoards of spam to my inbox if I didn't use a form and a captcha. It even has pictures but I guess that was too difficult for you.:)
I get frustrated like anyone else and tend to be negative sometimes as my post indicated. I am glad he was found not guilty, but you have to admit as far as anything fair these days it's extremely rare and I wouldn't be surprised if some attempt wasn't made to get him again. I would cite the present activity of our government to try and find a way to prosecute wikileaks operators / collaborators as one example.
My remark may have been off the cuff, but I begin to wonder what would have you so upset that you might actually make a personal attack out of it.
Just to quote the very front page of my site:
We believe in your right to believe in anything you want, regardless of what we believe, as long as you recognize and respect our right to believe in anything we want, regardless of what you believe.
That said I welcome you even if you disagree with my beliefs. That right ends however, on the contact link if your input is hateful or contains drama. You can postulate a differing opinion from mine, just not hateful.
Everyone seems to be missing the fact that Microsoft is Buying Skype. Bundle Skype with an internet enabled portable device and you can cut the phone carriers out quite significantly. Free texting, calls between Windows devices internationally.
I could think of more but I wouldn't be surprised. Then again, Our windows 7 machines have started getting calls from "windows help". hrm...
Whatever you want to make believe is fine. The end result was the same. He was tried twice, for the same accusation. Both involved some form of corporal punishment, both can land you in jail under certain circumstances.
Why do people insist on believing similar, or even identical, results are different if alternate paths to the conclusion were employed?
How did it not help him? Has he been acquitted in a criminal trial only to be brought to trial again in a criminal court for the same charges?
If so, how did it pass under the radar?
OJ had to go through a second, civil trial, which he lost and had to pay damages. So the point is that if the government were feeling nasty they could presumably try something similar.
I was handed a block of drives that had been in a server recently with software raid and asked to rebuild the array and recover the data. This had been assembled with mdadm. Will this change make such recovery a non issue with snapshots and the like, providing of course the array had been running btrfs?
Here you are most correct, and I must admit to attacking the example provided, rather than the argument providing it. Having this pointed out I had to hang my head.
but showing contempt for that curiosity is pretty contemptible.
The rest of your post echos my sentiments very deeply, and in a few places, chastised me. However I hold one thing out. I prefer to focus as much as I can on my particular profession / interest in order to excel in every capacity that I may be called in it. I see nothing wrong with that.
I think what you are trying to say is Intelligence is separate from knowledge, College gives you knowledge but not intelligence, yet knowledge magnifies intelligence.
Are you talking about schools not teaching the general population properly? Because I was under the impression that the topic was geeks.
A wikipedia page is a nice starting point as always, but self-teaching can lead to narrow knowledge, since there's no teacher to kick your butt and point out all the stuff you completely overlooked.
As I understood the topic, it was about geeks eschewing "Intellectual pursuits" and attributing lack of interest in outdated standards, such as college as an example.
You're an unoriginal automaton right now. It seems you're the person who should be reading some of the books mentioned. Or rather, any book from outside your current world view (the mentioned authors are by no means a requirement). "Expanding one's horizon" is something one rarely understands before actually having done it numerous times. I'm not saying you're narrow-minded, but simply latitudinally challenged on this particular topic.
This isn't about pontificating with a book and wine glass in hand, it's about experiencing ideas you never realized could exist.
Even colleges demand you focus by picking a Major. The point of my debate was the statement that you aren't considered an "intellectual" unless you had read certain works, or had a representation of the alphabet after your name. Everyone just sort of jumped on my bashing of college as a missed marker for intellectualism.
Right, so you appear to be concerned with business requirements, career, problem solving, possibly money. If this is the full extent of your interests, have fun!
In the future corporate states of America, this may well be more life saving than a gun.
The exact opposite, actually: so you can analyze them for their strengths and weaknesses, and adapt their strengths to make your own new discoveries and realizations.
No. That does not happen. By and large not until a person reaches their 40's or 50's. Young impressionable ( and often very drunk ) children enter college and are indoctrinated with the discoveries and realizations of those past. Doing the least amount possible to skate by. You will not do anything new, by repeating what's already been done. I agree that philosophy must be taught, so that people learn how to think. That can also be done outside of college. We over glorify college and it's outcome and as a result we have these retards entering the workforce today. America's decline in education shows this to be true. Don't try to tell me that doesn't happen, I have had to clean up their messes more times than I like to count.
And yet, as your comment's parent points out, you will have zero understanding of the concepts involved: you can memorize and regurgitate facts, but that's it. And without guidance by a credentialed expert in the field, you will have no understanding of the scholarly context to put them in their proper place.
Do not twist my words. For the most part those coming out of college have zero understanding. It's almost impossible to conceive an adequate response to this. You have a terrible arrogance. I understand what I do so much more than you realize. As do Millions of my peers. You are in effect stating that no learning or understanding is possible unless you have an instructor in some educational institution. You have definitely stated that any learning or understanding outside of college is useless. I, and millions more around the world prove this concept to be false. And for you to claim I have no understanding of the material involved because I eschewed anything more than the classes I took to get the information that is relevant to the task is infuriating. I would say this action demonstrates the ability to focus on what is important, and not be distracted, or lazy.
I have to ask where you draw the line? How much do you need to know in order to program in C or PHP? Do I need to know how to process the raw Silicon and know how to etch wafers, build a motherboard, the bios, and everything that goes into making a computer? Do I need to understand every logic bit that is switched per CPU cycle to be an effective C or C++ developer? Do I need to know how to build the car from scratch in order to be a professional driver? A pilot? Granted, you aren't going to see many successful self-taught doctors out there. There are a things a college is good for. But for anyone to say I have little to zero useful knowledge because I didn't *PAY* for the privilege, or to say that college endows the student with intelligence is unacceptable.
If there weren't people with ideas that refused to accept the current taught dogma the Earth would still be flat, and that the sun would still rotate about the Earth.
The reason to read the works of (or paraphrases of the works of) ancient or historical thinkers is because they introduced new concepts and new patterns of thought. You can study these concepts and their relationships, and rehearse these patterns of thought, and increase your intellectual ammunition and versatility.
So I can parrot these guys? Become an unoriginal automaton?
To think you don't need to get deep into some of these areas, and don't need to take time to wander around in each area of knowledge with expert guides, because "there is a wikipedia page for that", is the height of pseudo-intellectual arrogance. You will know the stuff in the same way a parrot knows it. And it will be as much use to you as it is to the parrot.
Damn right there is a wikipedia page for that, information isn't hard to come by these days. It's the ability to work with that information that's not being taught in hardly many schools
And to quote someone above:
Seeing college purely as exchanging money for employability in a particular field, of course it is a bad deal.
Welcome to the HR mandated curriculum. I wonder how many companies would soar to profitability by just laying off the whole damn HR money sink?
What enrages me nearly beyond comprehension is the expectation that we must be versed in the F*Tards listed above in order to be considered "Intellectual". F* you and your tired demarcation of what constitutes mental prowess. The fact is that we have *moved on* and live in the now of our own immediacy. Knowledge of these people will rarely help you in any business or IT environment.
Granted, It's important to know how to *think* and having read of these people will *NOT* increase your ability in that capacity. If it did, we wouldn't be awash in college graduates that have to be taught to close the damn bathroom door to take a piss. ( Yes, there has been this talk. )
College may have been fine and dandy when the knowledge pool took generations to change. These days you will spend more time in college than most IT jobs last. College has outlived it's paradigm.
So please, get off your intellectual high horse and stop trying to justify the excessive tuition you may still be making payments on. The need and applicability have been analyzed and it's waste of time and money.
Slashdot Mirror
This is utter crap.
I know lots of white people that would love to have a Job right now. *ANY* damn job. And can't because someone that doesn't have the right has it instead.
- Dan.
There will always be global warming, so long as there is money to be made from it.
- Dan.
Dammit We have a War dec starting today...
- Dan.
I call Bullsh!t.
There are different languages because everyone thinks they can invent a better one. Java, if I remember correctly, was a commercial venture. To be fair, I started with Apple Basic, then moved on to Assembly, not knowing of C until much later. But I was 15 and didn't know any better.
All these other programming languages lower the entry requirements to being a programmer, and in the process reduce the overall quality of available software. It's got to be done by someone though, and there's just too much that still needs coding to go back and redo everything that's been done in .NET. Microsoft will take a major credibility hit if it's going to produce a language and make it obsolete with later versions like it does with Windows.
It makes sense under this context to stick to a few mature language such as C or C++. Fast, efficient ( If programmed correctly ) And won't require re-writing every 10 years or so.
If you want to talk the right language for the job then lets talk Perl, PHP for web apps, C, C++ for OS and desktop apps, etc etc etc. We don't need 100+ different languages to write with.
- Dan.
RTFA FTW.
I can already do all these things Comcast is trying to sell, and it didn't take much for the customers employee's to destroy it all and go back to robbing the employer blind.
I can only imagine the fun consumers will have with this. Or the free tap Comcast may be giving the Govt...
- Dan.
Which brings us back to the beginning topic of this thread.
- Dan.
That's a fair question. But the facts remain. I am certainly interested in how this plays out.
- Dan.
Lol
I am flattered, if not a little alarmed that you took the time to visit my personal website. i shall have to fill it out more this weekend maybe. I am sorry you don't like Mormons. That doesn't make me weird. As for email, I would be an idiot to invite hoards of spam to my inbox if I didn't use a form and a captcha. It even has pictures but I guess that was too difficult for you. :)
I get frustrated like anyone else and tend to be negative sometimes as my post indicated. I am glad he was found not guilty, but you have to admit as far as anything fair these days it's extremely rare and I wouldn't be surprised if some attempt wasn't made to get him again. I would cite the present activity of our government to try and find a way to prosecute wikileaks operators / collaborators as one example.
My remark may have been off the cuff, but I begin to wonder what would have you so upset that you might actually make a personal attack out of it.
Just to quote the very front page of my site:
We believe in your right to believe in anything you want, regardless of what we believe, as long as you recognize and respect our right to believe in anything we want, regardless of what you believe.
That said I welcome you even if you disagree with my beliefs. That right ends however, on the contact link if your input is hateful or contains drama. You can postulate a differing opinion from mine, just not hateful.
Peace and God Bless,
- Dan.
*Amen*
Everyone seems to be missing the fact that Microsoft is Buying Skype. Bundle Skype with an internet enabled portable device and you can cut the phone carriers out quite significantly. Free texting, calls between Windows devices internationally.
I could think of more but I wouldn't be surprised. Then again, Our windows 7 machines have started getting calls from "windows help". hrm...
- Dan.
Whatever you want to make believe is fine. The end result was the same. He was tried twice, for the same accusation. Both involved some form of corporal punishment, both can land you in jail under certain circumstances.
Why do people insist on believing similar, or even identical, results are different if alternate paths to the conclusion were employed?
- Dan.
How did it not help him? Has he been acquitted in a criminal trial only to be brought to trial again in a criminal court for the same charges?
If so, how did it pass under the radar?
OJ had to go through a second, civil trial, which he lost and had to pay damages. So the point is that if the government were feeling nasty they could presumably try something similar.
*Bingo*
Didn't help OJ.
- Dan.
Not a problem, Obama will simply replace a few judges and re-try the case.
Watch it happen.
- Dan.
Re-installing windows is hardly what I would call a viable roll back...
- Dan.
I was handed a block of drives that had been in a server recently with software raid and asked to rebuild the array and recover the data. This had been assembled with mdadm. Will this change make such recovery a non issue with snapshots and the like, providing of course the array had been running btrfs?
- Dan.
He's not going to jail, The cops just don't want the software purchase showing up on the books. His next stop is likely the NSA.
Brb, Helicopters outside again...
- Dan.
Here you are most correct, and I must admit to attacking the example provided, rather than the argument providing it. Having this pointed out I had to hang my head.
but showing contempt for that curiosity is pretty contemptible.
The rest of your post echos my sentiments very deeply, and in a few places, chastised me. However I hold one thing out. I prefer to focus as much as I can on my particular profession / interest in order to excel in every capacity that I may be called in it. I see nothing wrong with that.
- Dan.
I think what you are trying to say is Intelligence is separate from knowledge, College gives you knowledge but not intelligence, yet knowledge magnifies intelligence.
This says it so much better than I could hope to.
Are you talking about schools not teaching the general population properly? Because I was under the impression that the topic was geeks.
A wikipedia page is a nice starting point as always, but self-teaching can lead to narrow knowledge, since there's no teacher to kick your butt and point out all the stuff you completely overlooked.
As I understood the topic, it was about geeks eschewing "Intellectual pursuits" and attributing lack of interest in outdated standards, such as college as an example.
You're an unoriginal automaton right now. It seems you're the person who should be reading some of the books mentioned. Or rather, any book from outside your current world view (the mentioned authors are by no means a requirement). "Expanding one's horizon" is something one rarely understands before actually having done it numerous times. I'm not saying you're narrow-minded, but simply latitudinally challenged on this particular topic.
This isn't about pontificating with a book and wine glass in hand, it's about experiencing ideas you never realized could exist.
Even colleges demand you focus by picking a Major. The point of my debate was the statement that you aren't considered an "intellectual" unless you had read certain works, or had a representation of the alphabet after your name. Everyone just sort of jumped on my bashing of college as a missed marker for intellectualism.
Right, so you appear to be concerned with business requirements, career, problem solving, possibly money. If this is the full extent of your interests, have fun!
In the future corporate states of America, this may well be more life saving than a gun.
- Dan.
The exact opposite, actually: so you can analyze them for their strengths and weaknesses, and adapt their strengths to make your own new discoveries and realizations.
No. That does not happen. By and large not until a person reaches their 40's or 50's. Young impressionable ( and often very drunk ) children enter college and are indoctrinated with the discoveries and realizations of those past. Doing the least amount possible to skate by. You will not do anything new, by repeating what's already been done. I agree that philosophy must be taught, so that people learn how to think. That can also be done outside of college. We over glorify college and it's outcome and as a result we have these retards entering the workforce today. America's decline in education shows this to be true. Don't try to tell me that doesn't happen, I have had to clean up their messes more times than I like to count.
And yet, as your comment's parent points out, you will have zero understanding of the concepts involved: you can memorize and regurgitate facts, but that's it. And without guidance by a credentialed expert in the field, you will have no understanding of the scholarly context to put them in their proper place.
Do not twist my words. For the most part those coming out of college have zero understanding. It's almost impossible to conceive an adequate response to this. You have a terrible arrogance. I understand what I do so much more than you realize. As do Millions of my peers. You are in effect stating that no learning or understanding is possible unless you have an instructor in some educational institution. You have definitely stated that any learning or understanding outside of college is useless. I, and millions more around the world prove this concept to be false. And for you to claim I have no understanding of the material involved because I eschewed anything more than the classes I took to get the information that is relevant to the task is infuriating. I would say this action demonstrates the ability to focus on what is important, and not be distracted, or lazy.
I have to ask where you draw the line? How much do you need to know in order to program in C or PHP? Do I need to know how to process the raw Silicon and know how to etch wafers, build a motherboard, the bios, and everything that goes into making a computer? Do I need to understand every logic bit that is switched per CPU cycle to be an effective C or C++ developer? Do I need to know how to build the car from scratch in order to be a professional driver? A pilot? Granted, you aren't going to see many successful self-taught doctors out there. There are a things a college is good for. But for anyone to say I have little to zero useful knowledge because I didn't *PAY* for the privilege, or to say that college endows the student with intelligence is unacceptable.
If there weren't people with ideas that refused to accept the current taught dogma the Earth would still be flat, and that the sun would still rotate about the Earth.
- Dan.
The reason to read the works of (or paraphrases of the works of) ancient or historical thinkers is because they introduced new concepts and new patterns of thought. You can study these concepts and their relationships, and rehearse these patterns of thought, and increase your intellectual ammunition and versatility.
So I can parrot these guys? Become an unoriginal automaton?
To think you don't need to get deep into some of these areas, and don't need to take time to wander around in each area of knowledge with expert guides, because "there is a wikipedia page for that", is the height of pseudo-intellectual arrogance. You will know the stuff in the same way a parrot knows it. And it will be as much use to you as it is to the parrot.
Damn right there is a wikipedia page for that, information isn't hard to come by these days. It's the ability to work with that information that's not being taught in hardly many schools
And to quote someone above:
Seeing college purely as exchanging money for employability in a particular field, of course it is a bad deal.
Welcome to the HR mandated curriculum. I wonder how many companies would soar to profitability by just laying off the whole damn HR money sink?
- Dan.
This sparks rage in me, and be prepared for a passionate, not flaming response.
Intellectual?
Plato? Proust? Swift? Wittgenstein? Wilde? Eco? Baudrillard? Pound? Spinoza? Aquinas? Borges?
What enrages me nearly beyond comprehension is the expectation that we must be versed in the F*Tards listed above in order to be considered "Intellectual". F* you and your tired demarcation of what constitutes mental prowess. The fact is that we have *moved on* and live in the now of our own immediacy. Knowledge of these people will rarely help you in any business or IT environment.
Granted, It's important to know how to *think* and having read of these people will *NOT* increase your ability in that capacity. If it did, we wouldn't be awash in college graduates that have to be taught to close the damn bathroom door to take a piss. ( Yes, there has been this talk. )
College may have been fine and dandy when the knowledge pool took generations to change. These days you will spend more time in college than most IT jobs last. College has outlived it's paradigm.
So please, get off your intellectual high horse and stop trying to justify the excessive tuition you may still be making payments on. The need and applicability have been analyzed and it's waste of time and money.
- Dan.
If Apple did this, they wouldn't be *selling* Apple laptops or desktops...
- Dan.