People who have a problem with breastfeeding in public should think about exactly why they have an issue with it.
I think it's pretty clear - they probably have no concept of women's breasts as non-sexual...
Every time there is a big deal made about it - it's basically equating a mother providing sustinance for her child in the most natural way possible with spring break flashing or something....It's just unbeleivable when you really think about it - especially because when breastfeeding (and especially when doing it in public) you can't even see a breast - usually the shirt is open giving the infant access to one breast and the baby's head is up againszt the breast, blocking any view anyway....
Measruing pupil diameter, heart rate, facial expression, etc - these things are not soley indicators of mal intent - we can say that sterotypically people who DO end up blowing things up may have had a faster heart rate or disalted pupils, etc....But we cannot say that if someone seems stressed out or angry or nervous (which a lot of people are, especially when going through a government checkpoint) that they are planning on blowing something up....
I can see it now...You're having an extremely bad day, maybe you suffer from a serious anxiety disorder, or just got in a fight with your significant other...you go through the checkpoint and they are ON YOUR ASS....(your day just got a whole lot worse because now you're being detained and questioned).
Just another stop on the surveillance society express.....If this continues at the rate it hsa been going, then eventually life in public may be like a giant jail with no bars....With cameras and 'wardens' everywhere, new technology to detect anyone who is out of the norm in apperarance, behavior, word, deed, maybe even your very thoughts......so that anyone who isn't a good productive little citizen who toes the party line is singled out for harrassment and eventually assimilated or constantly watched.
If it is a cartoon, or drawing, or created image than there is no crime in my opinion - because there is no victimization.
As reprehensible as child porn and everything that goes along with it is, criminalizing a drawing or something that is created as a work of art (and lets face it, art is in the eye and mind of the beholder, you cannot define art for other people) is basically creating "thoughtcrime."
It truly is a slippery slope to outlaw something like this, and people who think "well, this doesn't affect me and I am all for criminalizing this sort of stuff because anyone who would create such a thing is disgusting" are missing the point. I can't imagine anybody truly wanting the state deciding what you are allowed to think about, write about, draw, or create - there are so many unintended consequences here, and if they can outlaw what can be drawn, then there could be a time in the future that thinking or discussing something is illegal...
It just isn't right, it's not something that a "free country" should do. Look at what is happening in Australia as a perfect example of a government out of control with censorship and information control.
With this Whorley case this guy also had genuine child porn - charge him with that, but as for having Hentai/Manga? Leave it alone.
I totally agree....If my mod points weren't gone I'd + insightful on that....
The problem is that we don't truly have a functioning system - what we have could be described as forms of institutionalized corruption.
With this precious life that I have I have decided that I am not going to let tyrants deny me of freedoms I wish to undertake that meet my personal ethics, which are partly informed by things such as "the golden rule" etc.
No doubt, I agree on that point - especially (unfortunately) in America that is true of much of the public (we could discuss the poor public education in many places, the TV culture, etc for days and not say anything new) and also I think what you were saying about crowds holds especially true if any sort of danger or fear is introduced into the situation - but I would say that the majority of the people who are active on any given subject on Wikipedia generally aren't these same people....
I guess for me the possibility of errors (especially when they are made less likely with peer review) is much more acceptable than willfull manipulation, especially the sorts of willfull manipulation we've seen and it's true cost.
If we still had the mainstream media of those days I would agree with you. Things are utterly and completely different now - we have a corporate/government controlled media with an agenda.
>>The feds are simply punishing him and his family for outing their illegal activities. nothing different than what the organized crime people will do... well except they kill everyone, the Feds are not at that level yet.
I would be laughing my ass off at that last sentence, if it wasn't so terribly unfunny....
That argument (about what the internet was created for) is even more pointless than arguing the chicken or the egg - it's like asking if the sky is supposed to taste like blueberries...
The original Arpanet was evolved and transformed into something that is so dynamic and fantastic and completely eclipses anything - and of course it wasn't "created for" one or any specific purpose, but one of the core traditions of the internet and of online culture is the ability to be anonymous and use pseudonyms.
It is an EXTREMELY important facet of online culture and probably the last place where a whistleblower or someone with little wealth and/or power can expose the truth about any sort of authority or corporation with more power and not have to worry about retribution.
Obviously these points have ben very eloquently argued in the comments attached to the recent posting regarding Esther Dyson's comments regarding internet anonymity - but to break it down so that you can understand the point easily:
Anonymity is crucial, and just because some will abuse it doesn't mean that it should be stopped. People abuse cars, we don't ban them, people abuse firearms and knives, we don't ban them. Why? Because with any good thing there is always some asshole who will misuse it, but the benefits far outweigh this sort of thing, ESPECIALLY online.
Most western countries are plunging headfirst into neo-fascism, evolving into authoritarian surveillance societies where corporations are usingh the government to get rights, privileges and other things tha once were the sole domain of governments, and governments are using these corporations to do their dirty work and get around laws and regulations that prevent them from being able to do some of the shady things they'd like to do....
They can have this when I can have a device that will automatically search the computers, cars, homes and personages of all who are police, intelligence or politicians for any indication of corruption of any sort.
Once the people can have proof that these "authorities" have clean hands, pockets, and intentions - then maybe I would be halfway comfortable with this.
As it stands now, I see some people who don't understand technology (or freedom for that matter) being willing to give up rights that were hard won where people may have died fighting for the principles behind these rights.
I know the UK doesn't have the same constitutional/revolutionary founding principles that the US does, but people have got to be sick of this constant Orwellian slide going on in western society.
And here's the other thing:
Like whatever "One size fits all" bullshit they'd have would get around any sort of real encryption or someone truly knowledgable.
Maybe this would work out better for the 'criminals" than what they presently do (EG seizing the computer) because with the current method they can just hold on to the computer until they find the right forensics person or program to get the data.
Could be that this is just an end run around a warrant, (or whatever the UK equiv is) like they want to be able to plug this thing in any time they enter a home instead of having to get a warrant specifically to seize the computer)...
Nobody defamed a person, they mentioned their opinion about the condition of a business which this man apparently owns.
They owe him NOTHING.
Additionally, what he is likely to get from all of this is a little case of the "Streisand Effect," where now anyone who reads this story (which will get much wider coverage than the original posting) will now wondering the following:
1. Whether or not they want to chance eating at this establishment. 2. Assuming they decide they would, whether or not they want to support somebody who is fighting against anonymity online.
Kudos to our brethren down under. I believe that this is an issue where people NEED to protest and do whatever is necessary to prevent losing freedom on the internet means really does mean the end of the only real freedom we barely have left in western society; the uncensored net means freedom of comminication and expression, freedom to organize, etc...We know that US (and likely every other country) is recording everything that happens online, under the guide of keeping the world safe and "looking for terrorists" (the trump card of all political excuses, with it's little brother "think of the children.") I am not against common sense true security when it doesn't infringe on our collective rights and the constitution, but this definitely would (in the US) and does not provide true security.
Believe me, there are people in governments and corporations in the UK and US who want the same thing; shit, the UK has turned into a full blown surviellance society (and the US is quite bad).
This is an issue worth fighting over and not giving up for anything.
Look man, we voted - you weren't there, and even if you had been Berry Blue Kool-Aid won out over Green jello shots and Flavor-Aid - I know brand loyalty is important to the Flavor-Aid contingent, but I was hoping we could put the political infighting over drinks that has marred our organization for the past year behind us given the momentous journey we are all about to take.
Let's also not forget that you've gotten much more input than the rest of the flock - your selection of the white Nikes with the black swoosh was selected with my support (and Lunar Baby after I convinced her to drop her insane support of those shoes with the retractable wheels - sometimes I think some of you people might be unstable, but moving on...)
Listen my brother - soon we'll be movin on up, away from these trivial issues - hanging in a deluxe apartment in the sky, on our way to paradise...Just remember that...so kindly stfu and drink the fucking kool-aid!
1. Kool Aid (it should be blue) - CHECK 2. Cyanide - CHECK 3. Video Cameras to record our ascension to the spaceship that will take us to heaven - CHECK 4. Special freaky "cult blankies" to cover up with so when they find our "empty shell vessels" they know that this was a joyous occasion, and not some weird cult suicide thing - CHECK
I think we're ready....You guys just head to the mansion, there's plenty of kool-aid for everyone, but I olny have 25 futuristic cult blanky death shrouds, so you may want to bring you own, I suggest blue or black, but whatever you do just make sure it doesn't have snoopy or south park or some cartoon character...Star Wars is okay - we're videoing everything.
I think the first post states the case pretty clearly regarding negotiation - but inherent within that point there are some things to consider:
FIrst off, do you have significant leverage to negotiate? if you back out, how hard would it be for them to replace you and get what they want? Would it set the project back? If you are easily replaceable, then you don't have a lot of leverage to negotiate...
Also, how would leaving the project affect you in other ways? Would you lose valuable experience and contacts? would it make it difficult or impossible for you to do other work for this institution or others (EG would it give you a reputation as being difficult to work with)?
There are more things to consider than there appear to be on the surface.
Also, do you think that if you did do this work and didn't have the rights to it, could it really affect you down the road practically, or is it more of "I don't want to sign rights to my work away because it's my work and that's not right." (which I can totally empathize with, but which you may want to reconsider).....
Finally, is there anybody there who you cabn approach and discuss your concerns with? Maybe you can get rights to use the parts of your work that don't directly compete with or infringe on the compelted project and could get an agreement like that.
I'm did it; I did go to college, but didn't get a degree.
I am the IT director for a medical technology company and have been for several years now. I would say that any company that is innovative or really knows what they're doing is going to prize experience and knowledge over certs/diplomas.
If you want to do this I can tell you how I ended up where I am, and I think it's not an unusual trajectory for those who end up in this field without a degree:
1. learn all you can, you have to really like the work and having a knack for it, being good at learning new skills and picking up technical things helps a lot. You do need a solid base of at least some sort of knowledge to get your foot in the door.
2. Find a job as an intern or entry level employee at a small firm (start ups, non-corporate privately owned - perferably) somewhere where you can be mentored and where they use technology you are interested in. You need some skills before doing this, enough to bring at least something to the table - be willing to work hard, pay your dues and learn. I did this at a pirvately owned small ISP/consulting company that built and hosted websites/web applciations. I already had been building computers and doing freelance technical support and tutoring for people, and I learned everything didn't already know there in a few years, the following are just some of the things: Windows Server administration (IIS, DNS, networking etc); HTML, ASP, VBScript, the basics of working with databases, particularly SQL server (EG designing dbs, writing queries and stored procedures etc), the basics of dealing with code revision systems etc, and many other things.
3. In addition to providing me with a place to work with all sorts of hardware and software in live and development states and a mentor, I ended up getting all sorts of contacts in the IT field...That is the other key - after you learn enough to advance or outgrow a position, you need to know people who see that you're good at what you do. I got a reputation among the customers and clients of the company I worked for as someone who was knowledgeable and able to troubleshoot or fix just about any comptuer related issue who is patient and very good at taking very technical things and translating them into something non-technical lay people can understand..
4. One of those contacts was the company I now run IT for - we hosted their website and email and when they needed to solve some technical issues they called my boss and asked for me - I ended up doing consulting for them on several occasions. Eventually the companhy I worked for ended up moving all of their operations to hosted providers (like rackspace) as it ended up being less expensive, the owner retired and couldn't afford to pay me what I was worth so I left amicably. Two months later the CEO of the company I now worked for called my old boss to see if I was available. He gave them my number and I went and did contract work for them. after seeing that they were doing things like buying new PCs when a PC that was less than a year old had a minor problem, and that they were trying to host databases on consumer PCs instead of real servers and were growing to the point that that would be a serious issue for them I made recommendations - one was that they needed a real IT staff - we negotiated and I ended up where I am now. The company has grown significantly since that time.
So that is how I did it - I would say the real keys out of all of that though are to be self motivated and good at learning, and to find a mentor or place you get paid to learn new technical skills...That is crucial, because you have to learn somewhere, and you can learn a lot on your own and online, but it's by no means enough without the real world experience and the input and guidance of others.
No, that's not what she said, not at all...And even if she had it STILL wouldn't have made a difference. She is in no way responsible for the poor girls death.
The woman is a harpy no doubt, but this fucking case needs to be overturned post hast.
Yeah, I know the kind you mean - I have a couple of those.. the keyboards with the configurable keys are actually useful, because you can configure the buttons however you like easily - the laptops that had those buttons (at least when they first came out) were terrible as they weren't quite like that.
That's already been tried....Don't you remember the wave of "simplified" consumer laptops circa 1999/2000? especially Compaqs? That is exactly what they had, a big button right above the keyboard that glowed and said "INTERNET." SOme later said "WWW."
Then, they thought they had a good thing going so they added a special button for everything they thought the technically un-savvy user would want to do, you know, little envelope email icon buttons, little house icon home buttons...I thought - "this will be perfect for my parents..." I was so wrong.
The thing is that it was one of those things that sounds great in theory, especially if you're providing front line tech support, but in the real world it didn't work so well - first off, they tried 20 different way to make it work - some would only launch a browser; some were set to launch a wizard to get you connected to the net; which was supposed to go away once you had a connection set up, and turn into a browser launch button - the problem there was that if the connection you had set up wasn't one of one or two types the damn thing would constantly launch the wizard....It never worked right.
But the worst part about all of these things is that people spent time on trying to get this "simplified" crap to work when conencting to the net the normal way wasn't difficult and was soemthing that could be taught to even the most untechnical elderly user as long as you had the patience.
Be wary of people trying to "simplify" things that aren't that complicated; or who try to offer "solutions" to problems which aren't really problems.
Some people will always spend more time looking for a shortcut than it would take them to learn the the proper way to do something....
#1. What Lori Drew did was reprehensible and disgusting, but not illegal.
#2. She is not responsible for Megan's suicide in any way shape or form any more than you'd be responsible for my suicide if you told me to "fuck off and die" because you don't like this post.
#3. Using dubious interpretations of the legal system to persecute those who some feel have violated the social compact or acted outside of the bounds of what we consider to be normal decent behavior, yet who haven't violated a law is not only wrong, it's extremely dangerous and undermines everything that this country is supposed to stand for.
#4. Some people need to come off of it - your need to feel some sort of vindication by seeing that this woman is punished does not outweigh the damage done by this ruling to the rest of our rights. I am sure she is suffering for this, and I am sure she didn't really think that this girl would kill herself. Even if she did, that isn't a crime. People are responsible for their own actions - the world is a mean place, and if you're looking for someone to blame foir her suicide it makes more sense to blame her parents (though I don't think they are to blame either - depression is a bitch).
Slashdot Mirror
People who have a problem with breastfeeding in public should think about exactly why they have an issue with it.
I think it's pretty clear - they probably have no concept of women's breasts as non-sexual...
Every time there is a big deal made about it - it's basically equating a mother providing sustinance for her child in the most natural way possible with spring break flashing or something....It's just unbeleivable when you really think about it - especially because when breastfeeding (and especially when doing it in public) you can't even see a breast - usually the shirt is open giving the infant access to one breast and the baby's head is up againszt the breast, blocking any view anyway....
I find this sort of thing to be kind of scary.
Measruing pupil diameter, heart rate, facial expression, etc - these things are not soley indicators of mal intent - we can say that sterotypically people who DO end up blowing things up may have had a faster heart rate or disalted pupils, etc....But we cannot say that if someone seems stressed out or angry or nervous (which a lot of people are, especially when going through a government checkpoint) that they are planning on blowing something up....
I can see it now...You're having an extremely bad day, maybe you suffer from a serious anxiety disorder, or just got in a fight with your significant other...you go through the checkpoint and they are ON YOUR ASS....(your day just got a whole lot worse because now you're being detained and questioned).
Just another stop on the surveillance society express.....If this continues at the rate it hsa been going, then eventually life in public may be like a giant jail with no bars....With cameras and 'wardens' everywhere, new technology to detect anyone who is out of the norm in apperarance, behavior, word, deed, maybe even your very thoughts......so that anyone who isn't a good productive little citizen who toes the party line is singled out for harrassment and eventually assimilated or constantly watched.
Seriously....Are you seriously comparing a drawing or a cartoon, which puts no lives at risk, to someone operating a vehicle while intoxicated?
It's a poor analogy and not even the same thing.
If it is a cartoon, or drawing, or created image than there is no crime in my opinion - because there is no victimization.
As reprehensible as child porn and everything that goes along with it is, criminalizing a drawing or something that is created as a work of art (and lets face it, art is in the eye and mind of the beholder, you cannot define art for other people) is basically creating "thoughtcrime."
It truly is a slippery slope to outlaw something like this, and people who think "well, this doesn't affect me and I am all for criminalizing this sort of stuff because anyone who would create such a thing is disgusting" are missing the point. I can't imagine anybody truly wanting the state deciding what you are allowed to think about, write about, draw, or create - there are so many unintended consequences here, and if they can outlaw what can be drawn, then there could be a time in the future that thinking or discussing something is illegal...
It just isn't right, it's not something that a "free country" should do. Look at what is happening in Australia as a perfect example of a government out of control with censorship and information control.
With this Whorley case this guy also had genuine child porn - charge him with that, but as for having Hentai/Manga? Leave it alone.
I totally agree....If my mod points weren't gone I'd + insightful on that....
The problem is that we don't truly have a functioning system - what we have could be described as forms of institutionalized corruption.
With this precious life that I have I have decided that I am not going to let tyrants deny me of freedoms I wish to undertake that meet my personal ethics, which are partly informed by things such as "the golden rule" etc.
No doubt, I agree on that point - especially (unfortunately) in America that is true of much of the public (we could discuss the poor public education in many places, the TV culture, etc for days and not say anything new) and also I think what you were saying about crowds holds especially true if any sort of danger or fear is introduced into the situation - but I would say that the majority of the people who are active on any given subject on Wikipedia generally aren't these same people....
I guess for me the possibility of errors (especially when they are made less likely with peer review) is much more acceptable than willfull manipulation, especially the sorts of willfull manipulation we've seen and it's true cost.
If we still had the mainstream media of those days I would agree with you. Things are utterly and completely different now - we have a corporate/government controlled media with an agenda.
I'll take that truth, (where masses of ordinary people peer review said truth) versus the "truth" we get from mainstream news networks.
My customer cluster, composed of 10 TI-99's, 4 TRS-80s, and 4 Apple II's
>>The feds are simply punishing him and his family for outing their illegal activities. nothing different than what the organized crime people will do... well except they kill everyone, the Feds are not at that level yet.
I would be laughing my ass off at that last sentence, if it wasn't so terribly unfunny....
That argument (about what the internet was created for) is even more pointless than arguing the chicken or the egg - it's like asking if the sky is supposed to taste like blueberries...
The original Arpanet was evolved and transformed into something that is so dynamic and fantastic and completely eclipses anything - and of course it wasn't "created for" one or any specific purpose, but one of the core traditions of the internet and of online culture is the ability to be anonymous and use pseudonyms.
It is an EXTREMELY important facet of online culture and probably the last place where a whistleblower or someone with little wealth and/or power can expose the truth about any sort of authority or corporation with more power and not have to worry about retribution.
Obviously these points have ben very eloquently argued in the comments attached to the recent posting regarding Esther Dyson's comments regarding internet anonymity - but to break it down so that you can understand the point easily:
Anonymity is crucial, and just because some will abuse it doesn't mean that it should be stopped. People abuse cars, we don't ban them, people abuse firearms and knives, we don't ban them. Why? Because with any good thing there is always some asshole who will misuse it, but the benefits far outweigh this sort of thing, ESPECIALLY online.
Most western countries are plunging headfirst into neo-fascism, evolving into authoritarian surveillance societies where corporations are usingh the government to get rights, privileges and other things tha once were the sole domain of governments, and governments are using these corporations to do their dirty work and get around laws and regulations that prevent them from being able to do some of the shady things they'd like to do....
SO now more than even anonymity is KEY.
They can have this when I can have a device that will automatically search the computers, cars, homes and personages of all who are police, intelligence or politicians for any indication of corruption of any sort.
Once the people can have proof that these "authorities" have clean hands, pockets, and intentions - then maybe I would be halfway comfortable with this.
As it stands now, I see some people who don't understand technology (or freedom for that matter) being willing to give up rights that were hard won where people may have died fighting for the principles behind these rights.
I know the UK doesn't have the same constitutional/revolutionary founding principles that the US does, but people have got to be sick of this constant Orwellian slide going on in western society.
And here's the other thing:
Like whatever "One size fits all" bullshit they'd have would get around any sort of real encryption or someone truly knowledgable.
Maybe this would work out better for the 'criminals" than what they presently do (EG seizing the computer) because with the current method they can just hold on to the computer until they find the right forensics person or program to get the data.
Could be that this is just an end run around a warrant, (or whatever the UK equiv is) like they want to be able to plug this thing in any time they enter a home instead of having to get a warrant specifically to seize the computer)...
I call bullshit.
Nobody defamed a person, they mentioned their opinion about the condition of a business which this man apparently owns.
They owe him NOTHING.
Additionally, what he is likely to get from all of this is a little case of the "Streisand Effect," where now anyone who reads this story (which will get much wider coverage than the original posting) will now wondering the following:
1. Whether or not they want to chance eating at this establishment.
2. Assuming they decide they would, whether or not they want to support somebody who is fighting against anonymity online.
I thought the next steps were as follows:
To resist politically by any means necessary, including taking to the streets.
To resist electronically by circumventing this bullshit.
Now THAT'S the passion we expect from you Italians!
Kudos to our brethren down under. I believe that this is an issue where people NEED to protest and do whatever is necessary to prevent losing freedom on the internet means really does mean the end of the only real freedom we barely have left in western society; the uncensored net means freedom of comminication and expression, freedom to organize, etc...We know that US (and likely every other country) is recording everything that happens online, under the guide of keeping the world safe and "looking for terrorists" (the trump card of all political excuses, with it's little brother "think of the children.") I am not against common sense true security when it doesn't infringe on our collective rights and the constitution, but this definitely would (in the US) and does not provide true security.
Believe me, there are people in governments and corporations in the UK and US who want the same thing; shit, the UK has turned into a full blown surviellance society (and the US is quite bad).
This is an issue worth fighting over and not giving up for anything.
Ah..HTH NE1 - I knew you'd bring this up.
Look man, we voted - you weren't there, and even if you had been Berry Blue Kool-Aid won out over Green jello shots and Flavor-Aid - I know brand loyalty is important to the Flavor-Aid contingent, but I was hoping we could put the political infighting over drinks that has marred our organization for the past year behind us given the momentous journey we are all about to take.
Let's also not forget that you've gotten much more input than the rest of the flock - your selection of the white Nikes with the black swoosh was selected with my support (and Lunar Baby after I convinced her to drop her insane support of those shoes with the retractable wheels - sometimes I think some of you people might be unstable, but moving on...)
Listen my brother - soon we'll be movin on up, away from these trivial issues - hanging in a deluxe apartment in the sky, on our way to paradise...Just remember that...so kindly stfu and drink the fucking kool-aid!
Thank you.
Taking a shit was fun enough before, now I have to worry about sudden stroke death.....FUCK!
Let's see:
1. Kool Aid (it should be blue) - CHECK
2. Cyanide - CHECK
3. Video Cameras to record our ascension to the spaceship that will take us to heaven - CHECK
4. Special freaky "cult blankies" to cover up with so when they find our "empty shell vessels" they know that this was a joyous occasion, and not some weird cult suicide thing - CHECK
I think we're ready....You guys just head to the mansion, there's plenty of kool-aid for everyone, but I olny have 25 futuristic cult blanky death shrouds, so you may want to bring you own, I suggest blue or black, but whatever you do just make sure it doesn't have snoopy or south park or some cartoon character...Star Wars is okay - we're videoing everything.
I think the first post states the case pretty clearly regarding negotiation - but inherent within that point there are some things to consider:
FIrst off, do you have significant leverage to negotiate? if you back out, how hard would it be for them to replace you and get what they want? Would it set the project back? If you are easily replaceable, then you don't have a lot of leverage to negotiate...
Also, how would leaving the project affect you in other ways? Would you lose valuable experience and contacts? would it make it difficult or impossible for you to do other work for this institution or others (EG would it give you a reputation as being difficult to work with)?
There are more things to consider than there appear to be on the surface.
Also, do you think that if you did do this work and didn't have the rights to it, could it really affect you down the road practically, or is it more of "I don't want to sign rights to my work away because it's my work and that's not right." (which I can totally empathize with, but which you may want to reconsider).....
Finally, is there anybody there who you cabn approach and discuss your concerns with? Maybe you can get rights to use the parts of your work that don't directly compete with or infringe on the compelted project and could get an agreement like that.
I'm did it; I did go to college, but didn't get a degree.
I am the IT director for a medical technology company and have been for several years now. I would say that any company that is innovative or really knows what they're doing is going to prize experience and knowledge over certs/diplomas.
If you want to do this I can tell you how I ended up where I am, and I think it's not an unusual trajectory for those who end up in this field without a degree:
1. learn all you can, you have to really like the work and having a knack for it, being good at learning new skills and picking up technical things helps a lot. You do need a solid base of at least some sort of knowledge to get your foot in the door.
2. Find a job as an intern or entry level employee at a small firm (start ups, non-corporate privately owned - perferably) somewhere where you can be mentored and where they use technology you are interested in. You need some skills before doing this, enough to bring at least something to the table - be willing to work hard, pay your dues and learn. I did this at a pirvately owned small ISP/consulting company that built and hosted websites/web applciations. I already had been building computers and doing freelance technical support and tutoring for people, and I learned everything didn't already know there in a few years, the following are just some of the things: Windows Server administration (IIS, DNS, networking etc); HTML, ASP, VBScript, the basics of working with databases, particularly SQL server (EG designing dbs, writing queries and stored procedures etc), the basics of dealing with code revision systems etc, and many other things.
3. In addition to providing me with a place to work with all sorts of hardware and software in live and development states and a mentor, I ended up getting all sorts of contacts in the IT field...That is the other key - after you learn enough to advance or outgrow a position, you need to know people who see that you're good at what you do. I got a reputation among the customers and clients of the company I worked for as someone who was knowledgeable and able to troubleshoot or fix just about any comptuer related issue who is patient and very good at taking very technical things and translating them into something non-technical lay people can understand..
4. One of those contacts was the company I now run IT for - we hosted their website and email and when they needed to solve some technical issues they called my boss and asked for me - I ended up doing consulting for them on several occasions. Eventually the companhy I worked for ended up moving all of their operations to hosted providers (like rackspace) as it ended up being less expensive, the owner retired and couldn't afford to pay me what I was worth so I left amicably. Two months later the CEO of the company I now worked for called my old boss to see if I was available. He gave them my number and I went and did contract work for them. after seeing that they were doing things like buying new PCs when a PC that was less than a year old had a minor problem, and that they were trying to host databases on consumer PCs instead of real servers and were growing to the point that that would be a serious issue for them I made recommendations - one was that they needed a real IT staff - we negotiated and I ended up where I am now. The company has grown significantly since that time.
So that is how I did it - I would say the real keys out of all of that though are to be self motivated and good at learning, and to find a mentor or place you get paid to learn new technical skills...That is crucial, because you have to learn somewhere, and you can learn a lot on your own and online, but it's by no means enough without the real world experience and the input and guidance of others.
No, that's not what she said, not at all...And even if she had it STILL wouldn't have made a difference. She is in no way responsible for the poor girls death.
The woman is a harpy no doubt, but this fucking case needs to be overturned post hast.
Yeah, I know the kind you mean - I have a couple of those.. the keyboards with the configurable keys are actually useful, because you can configure the buttons however you like easily - the laptops that had those buttons (at least when they first came out) were terrible as they weren't quite like that.
That's already been tried....Don't you remember the wave of "simplified" consumer laptops circa 1999/2000? especially Compaqs? That is exactly what they had, a big button right above the keyboard that glowed and said "INTERNET." SOme later said "WWW."
Then, they thought they had a good thing going so they added a special button for everything they thought the technically un-savvy user would want to do, you know, little envelope email icon buttons, little house icon home buttons...I thought - "this will be perfect for my parents..." I was so wrong.
The thing is that it was one of those things that sounds great in theory, especially if you're providing front line tech support, but in the real world it didn't work so well - first off, they tried 20 different way to make it work - some would only launch a browser; some were set to launch a wizard to get you connected to the net; which was supposed to go away once you had a connection set up, and turn into a browser launch button - the problem there was that if the connection you had set up wasn't one of one or two types the damn thing would constantly launch the wizard....It never worked right.
But the worst part about all of these things is that people spent time on trying to get this "simplified" crap to work when conencting to the net the normal way wasn't difficult and was soemthing that could be taught to even the most untechnical elderly user as long as you had the patience.
Be wary of people trying to "simplify" things that aren't that complicated; or who try to offer "solutions" to problems which aren't really problems.
Some people will always spend more time looking for a shortcut than it would take them to learn the the proper way to do something....
#1. What Lori Drew did was reprehensible and disgusting, but not illegal.
#2. She is not responsible for Megan's suicide in any way shape or form any more than you'd be responsible for my suicide if you told me to "fuck off and die" because you don't like this post.
#3. Using dubious interpretations of the legal system to persecute those who some feel have violated the social compact or acted outside of the bounds of what we consider to be normal decent behavior, yet who haven't violated a law is not only wrong, it's extremely dangerous and undermines everything that this country is supposed to stand for.
#4. Some people need to come off of it - your need to feel some sort of vindication by seeing that this woman is punished does not outweigh the damage done by this ruling to the rest of our rights. I am sure she is suffering for this, and I am sure she didn't really think that this girl would kill herself. Even if she did, that isn't a crime. People are responsible for their own actions - the world is a mean place, and if you're looking for someone to blame foir her suicide it makes more sense to blame her parents (though I don't think they are to blame either - depression is a bitch).