I have never had a problem driving my.Net roadster. I get in, turn the key, and get rolling. Java is like having to build a kit before I can drive it. Great fun if you're a gear head. Not so great if your goal is to meet a business objective and your wife for dinner all in the same day.
When caught, kick them out of Comp Sci and let them enroll in Business or Political Science
I had a coworker one place I worked, that would take her programming assignments around the floor and find someone not to loaded down to "mentor" her in how to perform the task. We didn't catch on until later when we started comparing notes and realized that she was basically outsourcing her job to her coworkers for free. She was, of course, promoted to a management position.
Oh horrors. Wikipedia might not be 100% accurate? Shiver me timbers. Next you will tell me that the Easter Bunny didn't hide those eggs in my back yard.
Wikipedia is a great place to get quick information. It is broad, dynamic, and constantly evolving. But I would no more blindly trust its contents than I would the Huffington Post or MSNBC. When confronted with a new topic I will frequently hit Wikipedia in order to quickly find some basic background that will introduce me to the issues and vocabulary that surround the topic. But where I came from you NEVER rely on ANY single source for facts.
Every author has bias, and the mere act of authoring a piece introduces that bias. Even if only through the choice of what data to include and what to pass over. An honest author will generally indicate areas of contention or uncertainty. We as consumers, however, should rely on neither the honesty nor the informedness of any given author. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the consumer to analyze the offering with a critical eye and to seek out addtional contrasting sources before forming a lasting opinion. The truth is out there... but never in just one place.
Lawyer Bully stomping around intimidating the other kids.
Only recourse? Get a bigger lawyer.
I hate that about our society.
Forget gravity, relativity, etcetera:
There are two fundamental forces in the universe:
1) Lawyers
2) Accountants
So people who get through the lights without getting hit become revenue, and people who get hit going through lights become justifications for increased monitoring of intersections and more cameras! Truly an inspired plan, by a truly devious government.
Q: What is the difference between an act of crime and an act of war? A: It depends.
Q: How will you respond to any given act? A: It depends.
And so on.
Absolutely Correct! Ding ding ding!
With all the agencies, task forces, bureacracies, jurisdictions, laws, lawyers... figuring out who gets to play in any given round probably takes up a large part of the brain-capital of our nations response teams. You have someone hacking into a satellite that watches the Florida coastline. You find out that it is a group with known ties to both terroist and drug smuggling groups. Do you call the DEA because of the drugs, FBI because of the terroists, AFCC because of the satellite, the psychic hotline to help you choose one, all of the above, none of the above?
I'm reading that AFCC intends to equip and stand ready to do the job wherever and whenever their superiors order them into the fray. In the meantime, they'll monitor items of interest to themselves, and let those same superiors do the wrangling with the other teams to figure out who takes point on any given issue.
On the other hand, it would have been nice to get more information on how AFCC intends to differentiate themselves from the pack. What makes them special? What do they bring to the table that we don't already have?
Off the cuff estimate, roughly 90% of the best and brightest IT minds I personally know and including myself, the ones that git-er-done, have given up on long days, fixed pay, lousy conditions, incompetent management, threat of outsourcing, and mental cruelty. A lot of your "skilled" people bail out. We're smart, so we take jobs in lower paying, but more secure and laid back not-for-profits, or find a new second career. We've been in the industry for 10-20 years and want to do things like have families, and see our friends once in a while. I was personally told repeatedly by my management that they could hire 2 college grads or 4 foreign workers for the price of me and if I didn't like 80hr weeks I was welcome to leave. So I did.
Wikipedia, or any other "reference" work is biased by definition. All authors are inherently biased in some way and their writing reflects it. Any conclusion drawn in a research task should be supported by a minimum of 3 sources.
It is a known issue that Cerner encourages positive responses to workplace surveys while ranting at those who provide less than positive feedback. In fact they are proud of it, internally.
Bob: "Why do you have a banana in your ear?"
Joe: "To keep the (lions/tigers/bears) away."
Bob: "Does it work?"
Joe: "See any (lions/tigers/bears) around here?"
after all...
Research shows approximately 99.9% of persons born are later found to be dead. The remaining 0.1% went on to become prominent figures in various religious cults.
Should the 'victim' have the right to pursue a libel suit if he wants? Sure. No problem. Have him hire his lawyer and take it to the courts.
Should internet chat rooms, bulletin boards, and other services and conduits be regulated and held accountable for the actions of their users? Heck no. Let the disclaimer stand. These services are a medium of communication. Would any sane human being suggest that AT&T or Sprint provide a chaperone to sit in on every telephone (or even conference) call just to be certain that all of the information and opinions presented meet with the current governmentally and legally sanctioned view of what is proper? And who determines what is proper, anyway? The FBI? The Republican Party? The Catholic church? The Nazi Party? The Kansas school board?
Should those services be required to participate with courts and law enforcement pursuing their duly appointed tasks? Absolutely, within reason as defined by the law. Shaping the proper laws to cover the situations that might arise being another issue and discussion.
Should Wikipedia or any other conduit or service comply with requests from 'victims' asking for the removal or alteration of content considered by them to be incorrect or inflamatory? That is a customer service issue, not a legal one.
Can any single source of information ever be considered perfect? No, absolutely not. Any two not-plagarising authors will always have differing perspectives influenced by their knowledge, experience, and the society in which they were raised. That is why any serious research examines multiple independent sources.
Wikipedia is a phenomenally wonderful resource in the free exchange of ideas. It should be nurtured and protected by any free thinking person, keeping in mind that with free speech:
1) not everyone agrees with you 2) you frequently get what you pay for
I'm no fan of IE, but I'd guess that they probably are taking deliberate and reasoned steps in their code to identify IE 6. According to another post FEMA originally developed the application for use in house. Having worked on a few intranet portals, it is not all that uncommon for an organization to establish a specific browser version as the required one. This reduces support overhead by not allowing multiple browsers, or even multiple versions of the same browser. So basically they are getting yelled at now for making design decisions that saved some time and tax dollars earlier.
Slashdot Mirror
I have never had a problem driving my .Net roadster. I get in, turn the key, and get rolling. Java is like having to build a kit before I can drive it. Great fun if you're a gear head. Not so great if your goal is to meet a business objective and your wife for dinner all in the same day.
When caught, kick them out of Comp Sci and let them enroll in Business or Political Science I had a coworker one place I worked, that would take her programming assignments around the floor and find someone not to loaded down to "mentor" her in how to perform the task. We didn't catch on until later when we started comparing notes and realized that she was basically outsourcing her job to her coworkers for free. She was, of course, promoted to a management position.
Java is to .Net as USSR was to USA
Clunky, slow, and inefficient
But providing enough threat to keep high tech development rolling along
Gosh, all of us .Net developers must be mass hallucinating.
Oh horrors. Wikipedia might not be 100% accurate? Shiver me timbers.
... but never in just one place.
Next you will tell me that the Easter Bunny didn't hide those eggs in my back yard.
Wikipedia is a great place to get quick information. It is broad, dynamic, and constantly evolving. But I would no more blindly trust its contents than I would the Huffington Post or MSNBC. When confronted with a new topic I will frequently hit Wikipedia in order to quickly find some basic background that will introduce me to the issues and vocabulary that surround the topic. But where I came from you NEVER rely on ANY single source for facts.
Every author has bias, and the mere act of authoring a piece introduces that bias. Even if only through the choice of what data to include and what to pass over. An honest author will generally indicate areas of contention or uncertainty. We as consumers, however, should rely on neither the honesty nor the informedness of any given author. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the consumer to analyze the offering with a critical eye and to seek out addtional contrasting sources before forming a lasting opinion. The truth is out there
Lawyer Bully stomping around intimidating the other kids. Only recourse? Get a bigger lawyer. I hate that about our society. Forget gravity, relativity, etcetera: There are two fundamental forces in the universe: 1) Lawyers 2) Accountants
So people who get through the lights without getting hit become revenue, and people who get hit going through lights become justifications for increased monitoring of intersections and more cameras! Truly an inspired plan, by a truly devious government.
Q: What constitutes an act of war?
... figuring out who gets to play in any given round probably takes up a large part of the brain-capital of our nations response teams. You have someone hacking into a satellite that watches the Florida coastline. You find out that it is a group with known ties to both terroist and drug smuggling groups. Do you call the DEA because of the drugs, FBI because of the terroists, AFCC because of the satellite, the psychic hotline to help you choose one, all of the above, none of the above?
A: It depends.
Q: What is the difference between an act of crime and an act of war?
A: It depends.
Q: How will you respond to any given act?
A: It depends.
And so on.
Absolutely Correct! Ding ding ding!
With all the agencies, task forces, bureacracies, jurisdictions, laws, lawyers
I'm reading that AFCC intends to equip and stand ready to do the job wherever and whenever their superiors order them into the fray. In the meantime, they'll monitor items of interest to themselves, and let those same superiors do the wrangling with the other teams to figure out who takes point on any given issue.
On the other hand, it would have been nice to get more information on how AFCC intends to differentiate themselves from the pack. What makes them special? What do they bring to the table that we don't already have?
Off the cuff estimate, roughly 90% of the best and brightest IT minds I personally know and including myself, the ones that git-er-done, have given up on long days, fixed pay, lousy conditions, incompetent management, threat of outsourcing, and mental cruelty. A lot of your "skilled" people bail out. We're smart, so we take jobs in lower paying, but more secure and laid back not-for-profits, or find a new second career. We've been in the industry for 10-20 years and want to do things like have families, and see our friends once in a while. I was personally told repeatedly by my management that they could hire 2 college grads or 4 foreign workers for the price of me and if I didn't like 80hr weeks I was welcome to leave. So I did.
Aw, you got to it before I could!
Wikipedia, or any other "reference" work is biased by definition. All authors are inherently biased in some way and their writing reflects it. Any conclusion drawn in a research task should be supported by a minimum of 3 sources.
Reporter: "Captain Amazing, is it true you lost the Pepsi endorsement?" CA: "I ... hadn't heard that."
declare war on privacy.
It is a known issue that Cerner encourages positive responses to workplace surveys while ranting at those who provide less than positive feedback. In fact they are proud of it, internally.
To paraphrase Eddie Izzard ...
"Cake or Love?"
"Cake please!"
In order to prove intelligent design, shouldn't someone first manage to prove the existence of intelligence, somewhere, anywhere?
Bob: "Why do you have a banana in your ear?" Joe: "To keep the (lions/tigers/bears) away." Bob: "Does it work?" Joe: "See any (lions/tigers/bears) around here?" after all ...
Research shows approximately 99.9% of persons born are later found to be dead. The remaining 0.1% went on to become prominent figures in various religious cults.
There are several issues here.
Should the 'victim' have the right to pursue a libel suit if he wants? Sure. No problem. Have him hire his lawyer and take it to the courts.
Should internet chat rooms, bulletin boards, and other services and conduits be regulated and held accountable for the actions of their users? Heck no. Let the disclaimer stand. These services are a medium of communication. Would any sane human being suggest that AT&T or Sprint provide a chaperone to sit in on every telephone (or even conference) call just to be certain that all of the information and opinions presented meet with the current governmentally and legally sanctioned view of what is proper? And who determines what is proper, anyway? The FBI? The Republican Party? The Catholic church? The Nazi Party? The Kansas school board?
Should those services be required to participate with courts and law enforcement pursuing their duly appointed tasks? Absolutely, within reason as defined by the law. Shaping the proper laws to cover the situations that might arise being another issue and discussion.
Should Wikipedia or any other conduit or service comply with requests from 'victims' asking for the removal or alteration of content considered by them to be incorrect or inflamatory? That is a customer service issue, not a legal one.
Can any single source of information ever be considered perfect? No, absolutely not. Any two not-plagarising authors will always have differing perspectives influenced by their knowledge, experience, and the society in which they were raised. That is why any serious research examines multiple independent sources.
Wikipedia is a phenomenally wonderful resource in the free exchange of ideas. It should be nurtured and protected by any free thinking person, keeping in mind that with free speech:
1) not everyone agrees with you
2) you frequently get what you pay for
The same people that feel they experienced Hamlet by seeing the Mel Gibson adaptation.
Alice: "They got to Webster!"
Playboy magazine, Penthouse magazine ... talk about a frontpage spread!
I'm no fan of IE, but I'd guess that they probably are taking deliberate and reasoned steps in their code to identify IE 6. According to another post FEMA originally developed the application for use in house. Having worked on a few intranet portals, it is not all that uncommon for an organization to establish a specific browser version as the required one. This reduces support overhead by not allowing multiple browsers, or even multiple versions of the same browser. So basically they are getting yelled at now for making design decisions that saved some time and tax dollars earlier.