I don't presume to speak for all women, but personally, I disagree in the strongest terms possible. It looks much, much, much better.
Now I understand that when you have a blue-collar/hardware job, it's probably impractical, but just because the option isn't really there doesn't mean dressing nicely wouldn't look better. (False dichotomy, much?) Sure, I also acknowledge that a lot of well-dressed people are insufferable idiots, but that only goes to show that neither style nor substance on its own quite cuts it; you need both. That said, I'm sure you guys also appreciate it when we take at least a token effort to show up in nice clothes / with nice hair etc.? Yeah, thought so. : )
Full disclosure: I am woman (roar). And I don't even wear cokebottle glasses. Perks that attract me (as IT jobs go): Open Source (and other things that qualify for "cool!" or "might make the world a better place" tags). Management by objectives (doesn't matter where or when I work, 's long as I get the job done by deadline). No bloody micro-management. Gee, that's something you can relate to? Women found reasonable? Film at eleven!1!! : )
Seriously, though.
As an engineer I don't care that much. Are they good enough so I don't have to clean up after them all the time? Are they agreeable workmates? Great. Doesn't matter whether they're girl or boy, as long as those conditions are met.
As a woman I acknowledge that a) the internet has an appreciable impact on the way that people live and communicate, and b) there's work in IT, and as long as we're told to vote with our money, work goes a long way, so yes, I'd appreciate women being part of "shaping the future(TM)."
Both being reasonable and important concerns, the synthesis is probably, "Yeah, I wish there were more competent women in IT" (even if I'd no longer be the hen of the walk : ). So it'd be nice if schools would nurture such talent in women. Because, remember, it's talented people that we all want to work with.
One last thing though... Maybe we should be a little less concerned about getting women into IT, and more about how they're treated once there? Like, Kathy Sierra, anyone? Like, Kos' completely asinine comment that he too gets nasty comments? For reference for what kind of nasty and inhuman stuff women visible on the 'net are exposed to -- oh well, just pretty much surf with open eyes, I guess. Let's be fair here. If you're good at your stuff, what is there to fear from women in the workforce? If you suck... well, I guess the rest of us don't want to work with an incompetent man any more than we wish to work with an incompetent woman. : )
On his website he claims the subject of a photograph should have copyright of it Actually, that's the law in some countries, which strangely haven't come to an end yet.
With laws like this, you might as well use that new digital camera as a bookend. Your point being? I bought a car, so I should be allowed to drive any way I damn well please? Just because I own a gun, I should have the right to shoot random people as I please?
Should we fine and arrest people who keep vulnerable systems on the web? I think not. If your computer gets infected with a virus or worm, no one dies. Sure, damages may be done, but no amount of commercial loss compares with murder.
People should only be fined/arrested for murder?
your idea would kill the Internet.
Whereas spam/DDoS drones do it a wealth of good. : )
The Internet is about freedom.
About communication, as well. Which spam doesn't exactly help with. About commerce, idiotic pop-unders and flash ads as well, some may argue -- especially since Joe Sixpack has "joined."
it is the least regulated, most anonymous medium accesible to Joe Sixpack. If people fear getting arrested for merely being online, they will find something else to do.
So Joe Sixpack will leave the internet? Cry me a river.
One thing people always forget is that speeding and runing reds rarely gets you there faster.
I don't think that's the point. It's the feeling (however silly) that you assert control over your own life. That you play by your rules, not somebody else's.
Enforcing copyright is enforcing copyright and if you want the GPL to be enforcable then you better learn to deal with RIAA's copyrights being enforcable too.
The Question isn't whether it's legal for them to do so, but whether it is wise. Or for some, whether it is morally justified. Different things altogether.
Vicious Lips -- remarkably watchable for an Albert Pyun film -- but then, how could a SciFi movie with so much trash and big hair be anything but?
And then of course, there's Brainstorm, an early '80s movie about braintaping, and one of the few movies where I didn't think, Hold on, they come up with a technology like that, and they don't use it for X? (in this case, taping someone dieing, having good sex, using it for torture etc.). Quite positive portrayal of geeks, as well.
Holy living fuck, that looks even better than Nautilus!
And that's not counting sick stuff like animated themes.;-) No worries, if you don't want those, the module won't be loaded -- no bloat.
But seriously, most of that credit must of course go to the artists. Without good icons, the icon-view is nothing. ; )
Is there a Debian package for unstable?
There are debs on SF, but they are out of date. I need to phase in some cleanup and optimizations. Expect new (0.9.5) debs in about two weeks.
now, have you seen efm? (not maintained since they focus on E17 now). g(*&^mn, that was a fine filemanager. no clutter, a sort of mixture between command-line and graphical shell, simple yet effective windows (a-la mac-os classic), really gorgeous.
"evidence" will basically be that -- efm features (icon-view, "typebuffer" micro-shell, with a browser-view a la Mac OS X thrown in for good measure), but on top of the new e17 libs. A working (if unoptimized) version can be pulled from CVS (cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/ evidence co evidence, don't bother with the 0.9.4 RPMs).
In other news (or, Look what we have in CVS!)
on
State of the E-nion
·
· Score: 1
e16 was just patched to work with current releases of GNOME and KDE, ie, e16.6 understands current hints.
Lastly, evidence
(Screenshot), the experimental e17 file-manager was accidentally left off the list because it resides in its own CVS @ cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/ evidence co evidence
I found Enterprise to be quite excellent, actually. Given that the only other Trek I'd call that, DS9, has suffered from the flaw all Trek shows prior to Enterprise had, namely a crappy first season and an outright painful pilot, Enterprise might even be "the best Trek show so far."
In other words, this show seems much less in need of change and adjustment than the previous Trek shows were at a comparable point in their respective histories -- YMMV.
...so please tell me what the big deal is? Sure, the fact that it's a graphical rather than a textual "viewport" to the virtual world might appeal to some (it may also keep the bad spellers et al. away from the MUSHes, not necessarily a bad thing), but let's face it, the screenshots looked pathetic even to me, and I don't consider myself to be an overly visually-oriented person to begin with...
To paraphrase, if you need a visual "crutch" for your imagination, this is sadly inadequate. If you don't, I fail to see what kind of value this service adds.
So magic items change; they are not 100 % predictable? I don't know about you, but that sounds just fine to me, keeps you wondering, keeps magic mysterious, keeps you on your toes.
a) Neo et al aren't the good guys, are they? They may prefer experiencing the crappy polluted remains of a world to the taste of a steak et al, but then they should just stay out of the matrix instead of spoiling it for everyone.
b) I like Trinity being in there as she is one of the rare breed of (relatively) kick-ass female characters. To call her "hot" however must be based on some new and arcane definition of attraction I was previously unaware of: CAM is cow-ugly. If you didn't notice it in the movie, check out the featurettes on the DVD. I salute the braveness it must have required to cast her (the same braveness it took to cast mature people for "The Thomas Crown Affair"), but let's still call a spade a spade: she isn't physically attractive by any common definition of the word, unless you call anyone in leather "hot".
One person may be good with the rocket launcher,
the next may be good with the BFG -- or the
debugger. Problems have solutions. Transcending
the presented solution-space to find meta-solutions, preferably including some nifty
code, seems more like something we should welcome
to me: the victory of geeky engineering over
gruntly brute-force. All hail the "cheater":
All hail the engineer.
Is remaining inside the proposed rules instead of
finding creative solutions to the problem at hand really something we want to encourage on/.?
If you suffer from Cinderella Complex, you need to find a guy that promises
- social security (okay, geeks have money) - status (well, you know what people think of geeks) - protection (well...) - and perchance someone to generally take care of your decisions and shite.
One out of four isn't great. And trainable... well, having to do that at 17 is okay-ish, I suppose, but at 25 or 30, most people I know expect their partner to know what they're doing. ; )
If OTOH you have no particular need of dating a father figure or what-not, why not date someone who can *really* understand the way you feel? ; )
HHOS, Azou
Disclaimer: I'm not saying all geeks are as described above; I'm referring to how the unassuming public seems to see you guys, in terms of stereotypes. Azundris
Slashdot Mirror
I don't presume to speak for all women, but personally, I disagree in the strongest terms possible. It looks much, much, much better.
Now I understand that when you have a blue-collar/hardware job, it's probably impractical, but just because the option isn't really there doesn't mean dressing nicely wouldn't look better. (False dichotomy, much?) Sure, I also acknowledge that a lot of well-dressed people are insufferable idiots, but that only goes to show that neither style nor substance on its own quite cuts it; you need both. That said, I'm sure you guys also appreciate it when we take at least a token effort to show up in nice clothes / with nice hair etc.? Yeah, thought so. : )
Full disclosure: I am woman (roar). And I don't even wear cokebottle glasses. Perks that attract me (as IT jobs go): Open Source (and other things that qualify for "cool!" or "might make the world a better place" tags). Management by objectives (doesn't matter where or when I work, 's long as I get the job done by deadline). No bloody micro-management. Gee, that's something you can relate to? Women found reasonable? Film at eleven!1!! : )
Seriously, though.
As an engineer I don't care that much. Are they good enough so I don't have to clean up after them all the time? Are they agreeable workmates? Great. Doesn't matter whether they're girl or boy, as long as those conditions are met.
As a woman I acknowledge that a) the internet has an appreciable impact on the way that people live and communicate, and b) there's work in IT, and as long as we're told to vote with our money, work goes a long way, so yes, I'd appreciate women being part of "shaping the future(TM)."
Both being reasonable and important concerns, the synthesis is probably, "Yeah, I wish there were more competent women in IT" (even if I'd no longer be the hen of the walk : ). So it'd be nice if schools would nurture such talent in women. Because, remember, it's talented people that we all want to work with.
One last thing though ... Maybe we should be a little less concerned about getting women into IT, and more about how they're treated once there? Like, Kathy Sierra, anyone? Like, Kos' completely asinine comment that he too gets nasty comments? For reference for what kind of nasty and inhuman stuff women visible on the 'net are exposed to -- oh well, just pretty much surf with open eyes, I guess. Let's be fair here. If you're good at your stuff, what is there to fear from women in the workforce? If you suck ... well, I guess the rest of us don't want to work with an incompetent man any more than we wish to work with an incompetent woman. : )
Don't you actually have to say something defamatory for that? (IANAL, but the entry in MW seems to suggest this.)
Vicious Lips -- remarkably watchable for an Albert Pyun film -- but then, how could a SciFi movie with so much trash and big hair be anything but?
And then of course, there's Brainstorm, an early '80s movie about braintaping, and one of the few movies where I didn't think, Hold on, they come up with a technology like that, and they don't use it for X? (in this case, taping someone dieing, having good sex, using it for torture etc.). Quite positive portrayal of geeks, as well.
And that's not counting sick stuff like animated themes. ;-) No worries, if you don't want those, the module won't be loaded -- no bloat.
But seriously, most of that credit must of course go to the artists. Without good icons, the icon-view is nothing. ; )
There are debs on SF, but they are out of date. I need to phase in some cleanup and optimizations. Expect new (0.9.5) debs in about two weeks.
"evidence" will basically be that -- efm features (icon-view, "typebuffer" micro-shell, with a browser-view a la Mac OS X thrown in for good measure), but on top of the new e17 libs. A working (if unoptimized) version can be pulled from CVS (cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/ evidence co evidence, don't bother with the 0.9.4 RPMs).
e16 was just patched to work with current releases of GNOME and KDE, ie, e16.6 understands current hints.
Lastly, evidence (Screenshot), the experimental e17 file-manager was accidentally left off the list because it resides in its own CVS @ cvs -z3 -d:pserver:anonymous@cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/ evidence co evidence
I found Enterprise to be quite excellent, actually. Given that the only other Trek I'd call that, DS9, has suffered from the flaw all Trek shows prior to Enterprise had, namely a crappy first season and an outright painful pilot, Enterprise might even be "the best Trek show so far."
In other words, this show seems much less in need of change and adjustment than the previous Trek shows were at a comparable point in their respective histories -- YMMV.
...so please tell me what the big deal is? Sure, the fact that it's a graphical rather than a textual "viewport" to the virtual world might appeal to some (it may also keep the bad spellers et al. away from the MUSHes, not necessarily a bad thing), but let's face it, the screenshots looked pathetic even to me, and I don't consider myself to be an overly visually-oriented person to begin with...
To paraphrase, if you need a visual "crutch" for your imagination, this is sadly inadequate. If you don't, I fail to see what kind of value this service adds.
So magic items change; they are not 100 % predictable? I don't know about you, but that sounds just fine to me, keeps you wondering, keeps magic mysterious, keeps you on your toes.
a) Neo et al aren't the good guys, are they? They may prefer experiencing the crappy polluted remains of a world to the taste of a steak et al, but then they should just stay out of the matrix instead of spoiling it for everyone.
b) I like Trinity being in there as she is one of the rare breed of (relatively) kick-ass female characters. To call her "hot" however must be based on some new and arcane definition of attraction I was previously unaware of: CAM is cow-ugly. If you didn't notice it in the movie, check out the featurettes on the DVD. I salute the braveness it must have required to cast her (the same braveness it took to cast mature people for "The Thomas Crown Affair"), but let's still call a spade a spade: she isn't physically attractive by any common definition of the word, unless you call anyone in leather "hot".
Uh-oh, I give permission to each attached shop
to send me snail-spam?
> N'Sync isn't running around the country raping
> your girlfriends and daughters.
Sure, only women get raped...
As if we hadn't known in advance that splicing the
SS with the SCA would render scary results... : (
"Puns don't kill people" etc.?
--One person may be good with the rocket launcher, the next may be good with the BFG -- or the debugger. Problems have solutions. Transcending the presented solution-space to find meta-solutions, preferably including some nifty code, seems more like something we should welcome to me: the victory of geeky engineering over gruntly brute-force. All hail the "cheater": All hail the engineer.
Is remaining inside the proposed rules instead of finding creative solutions to the problem at hand really something we want to encourage on /.?
Problems have solutions.
--Azundris
I don't quite see the point? : )
If you suffer from Cinderella Complex, you need
to find a guy that promises
- social security (okay, geeks have money)
- status (well, you know what people think of
geeks)
- protection (well...)
- and perchance someone to generally take care
of your decisions and shite.
One out of four isn't great. And trainable...
well, having to do that at 17 is okay-ish, I
suppose, but at 25 or 30, most people I know
expect their partner to know what they're doing.
; )
If OTOH you have no particular need of dating a
father figure or what-not, why not date someone
who can *really* understand the way you feel? ; )
HHOS,
Azou
Disclaimer: I'm not saying all geeks are as
described above; I'm referring to
how the unassuming public seems to
see you guys, in terms of stereotypes.
Azundris
"You're never too old to code when you're... too young to die..." SCNR, (A)