Anybody *can* contribute to our current system of governance.
In fact, I'd suggest that, for the average person, there are far lower requirements for getting your input incorporated into your government's laws than it would be for the average person to sit down and submit a patch to the Linux kernel.
The former requires persistence and persuasiveness. The latter requires persistence and persuasiveness AND a lot of expertise, experience, and skill. I'm not so certain that "open source software" would benefit from the "anybody can submit anything they like" model you suggest is the norm.
There's a reason why the term "benevolent dictator" has been applied to the leads of many open source projects. It's not because of their permissive policies regarding commits to the main trunk.
If they made this the ONLY way for you to login, rather than an option, then perhaps you'd have a case.
Of course, since this augments the current login system and is in no way mandatory, maybe you should also talk to a lawyer about whether or not you have cause to sue a business owner who installs a wheelchair ramp AND stairs at the entrance to their business.
What I find amazing is how many people here suddenly have Facebook accounts that they're worrying about being locked out of. It seems that Slashdotters move from "WUT IS DIS I NEVAR?" status to "ZOMG I won't be able to log in! QUELLE HORREUR!" with amazing rapidity.
The point he was making was that the president was trying to score funny points on it - and "pointing out something we all think," when it's his own administration that has foisted these new rules on us that he's cracking jokes about.
If Pres. Obama feels that these pat-downs are ridiculous and laughable, perhaps he should... oh, I don't know... direct his administration to change the requirement that calls for them?
You know, you could have spared us the inefficiency of reading all of your ranting, and simply condensed what you had to say down to its crucial emoticon essence:
Not in the least. You're suggesting that it's a brand of laziness that prevents people from building an effective team, and the underlying assumption there is that the guy without a degree is likely to be both the best candidate for the job, and the one most capable of doing it effectively.
I'm suggesting that that's a foolish assertion to make, because it's overwhelmingly likely that theres at least one person in that pile who is capable of doing the job just as effectively, and who holds a degree. This makes the degree criteria a useful criterion for an initial filter.
If you don't want to be filtered out, get a degree, or learn to network more effectively so you can bypass the filter process and get your resume in front of the hiring manager directly.
Yes, because nothing happens in any context of the broader conflict we're embroiled in. That video is the only battle American forces have seen in Iraq. They were just flying around Baghdad, saw some guys, and said "hey, let's kill those guys. It'll pass the time."
I'd say any place where there's a way you could make the functionality available through a reasonably clean web-like interface that doesn't require large amounts of raw text entry would be a suitable possibility, with bonus points if the solution's mobility and/or allowance for standing/walking while using it make life simpler for the user.
For instance, in the medical industry - diagnostic imaging ("let me pull up that x-ray from the database to look at it again..."), patient charts ("let me take a look at the notes the last doctor to talk to you here at the hospital entered..."), reference (medical conditions, drugs & medical).
Something as simple as retail order entry systems - small attachment to scan a bar code on a product or shelf, then enter the number of items to order. I know a store I worked at had a fairly convoluted ordering system that involved small handheld bar code scanners that we had to wander around the store with, and if you screwed up the entry, or batteries died, you could have to restart your order from the start... scan the wrong code, or get a bad scan, and sometimes end up with a large number of the wrong item... A tablet for entering that data with a display of the product you just scanned, plus easy quantity entry, plus perhaps a centralization feature to make sure that two people doing ordering don't both order 5 of the same product. Order done, review & send immediately from the device.
Basically, think of everything people do with small portable computers today, or have to sit at a desk in front of a desktop today, and ask "Does it need to be done that way?" A desktop computer isn't always the most efficient or convenient method for accomplishing things.
I read what you wrote, and it certainly seems that you're suggesting that we should be concerned about the Pope's announcements when you write, for instance:
"If you think that a proclamation of Jihad from the Vatican wouldn't motivate thousands of lunatics to go out and murder, rape, and pillage, you're a fool."
Considering that "jihad" in the current vernacular is almost exclusively prosecuted by *radicals* who in no way represent even a fragment of the mainstream of the religion they claim to be waging jihad on behalf of, to suggest that:
1) The Pope, as the head of the Catholic religion, might issue such a proclamation in 2011; 2) That any significant number of people would take it seriously if he did;
And the likelihood of any given person dying at the hands of a Pope-sponsored jihad? Certainly lower than your chances of dying to terrorism.
So why is it okay to live in fear of the Pope, but foolish to live in fear of dying to terrorism?
There are numerous self-styled smart dudes here who would be hasten to point out that many of our anti-terror measures are pointless, and we're wasting money and time on counteracting a threat that, on a societal scale, is fairly minor. But the fact that the Pope *could* influence a handful of Catholics if he declared a jihad is somehow something to be worried about?
I agree, look at migrating from MS Office 2003 to MS Office 2010 -- Did you re-evaluate MS Office when they adopted a different direction (ribbon)?
Yes, actually for the company I work for, the retraining and support costs associated with migrating to newer versions of Office has specifically been the factor cited in delaying that upgrade to investigate alternatives. It's also the reason we skipped upgrading to Vista and decided to stay on XP while pushing more Linux adoption across the enterprise, and also the reason why we *just* got upgraded to IE8, but have been able to download and install a corporate-sanctioned (and, in fact, "recommended except for the internal intranet sites that require IE") version of Firefox 3 for nearly 2 years now.
I know you're trying to make some point that FOSS is somehow less subject to these things than proprietary software, but that's simply not the case. When there are major changes and shifts in the technology and the strategy of ANY piece of software you use, you should re-evaluate its use to make sure that you are still going in the same direction strategically.
If you notice, I *did* say in my first sentence that all of these caveats are "not concerns that are specific to FOSS software."
I'd be wary of having a "piece of important business software" that you are in no position to support or maintain. If it's truly important enough to the success of your business then it's insane to not have the option of supporting it in house or creating a community driven fork that you, along with other businesses in the same boat can support.
Yeah, because hiring developers to work for you on customizing and supporting that software long-term isn't expensive at all. Building a consortium of "other businesses in the same boat" is also not a zero-cost operation. FOSS doesn't solve all of the problems of software any more than proprietary software does. So you choose the best tool for the job you need to do, and you re-evaluate whether or not the hammer you've been using for a few years is still the right solution when somebody suggests that it's going to be turned into a sledgehammer soon, and you do the same when somebody suggests that the sledgehammer you use today should be redesigned as a 16-ounce claw hammer next year.
So if the only person is the one without a degree, then you are left with a pool of zero candidates to submit to the hiring manager. What happens then?
What happens is that they'll loosen the filter criteria and send resumes of people who "almost" meet the requirements, and the person without the degree but all of the relevant experience will most likely be in that batch. If there's a bunch of "almost-qualifieds", and you're the only one without a degree, you're at a disadvantage.
Even if there are only two suitable people in that looser-requirements batch... and one has a degree, and the other doesn't - they're both suitable, neither quite meet the full letter of the requirements, but they're both close: who's got the edge?
"BS in Computer Science or equivalent," and you don't have a BS in Computer Science... that will significantly *decrease* your chances of getting an interview if your only path into the company is through the HR recruiter.
It is insurance against being disqualified, and those thousands of dollars you're spending now are an investment in future earnings. You're actually pretty lucky that your employer is encouraging you to get your degree, and subsidizing a good portion of it. Not a lot of people are so lucky.
If you're 30 years old, and expect to have your home paid off by 2016, then you are socking far more money into your mortgage than you strictly need to, assuming you bought your house even twelve years ago at age 18. And if you're paying down your mortgage at the expense of fully funding your retirement savings, then you should really go talk to a financial advisor, as delaying or shorting your retirement savings to pay down low-interest investment debt (your mortgage) is generally a bad idea. Model the scenario out even at relatively low rates of return, and you'll see that a few extra years paying into a 401k or IRA or similar can make huge differences in the money you'll end up with at the end of the next 20-30 years.
So you don't meet all of the criteria I laid out, and I suspect that a huge majority of people who would say "I'm a Catholic" that reads that question cannot honestly say that they fulfill those three simple criteria.
My point is not to bash Catholics or call them bad Catholics, but how much influence over your day-to-day behavior can anybody really believe the Pope has over you, if you don't even go to Church once a week? According to the church, regular mass attendance is very important because that's where you receive the sacrament of communion, one of the more important bits of being a Catholic... if the Pope really had the influence over behavior as is being suggested, I'd expect that Catholics would be there every week without fail.
anti-Judaic? anti-Islamic? Right here on Slashdot. Go back and read about the Israel/Palestine peace talk leaks. There's a lot of quite nasty rhetoric going both ways from people who claim to be disinterested parties.
You seem to think that the only person saying nasty things about other religions is Christians. You're quite wrong. This doesn't excuse the Christians who *are* spouting nonsense, but it applies equally well to anybody of any religious orientation.
You assume that in the pile of 300 resumes, there is only ONE person who could possibly do the job "effectively." You also suggest that the one person who could do the job is likely to be MORE suited to the job based on their lack of a degree.
In fact, it's likely that several dozen of them could be perfectly adequate employees. If 20 of them have all the prereqs you've asked for, PLUS a degree, and 1 doesn't, that 1 person is still "lacking something" that the other candidate has.
with nothing to show for it except the fact that I might not get looked over if I ever try to find a new job.
If you don't consider the earning potential of the rest of your career worth a few thousand dollars in debt to get the piece of paper as insurance, then there is something oddly skewed with your priorities.
You're right. I have a degree in Biology. I work as a software engineer. I worked with a history major, who was also a software engineer. I also work with a guy who got his undergrad degree in french literature. No lie.
A non-engineering / non-computer-science degree certainly doesn't help in the computer field, but once you've gotten your foot in the door and a few years of experience under your belt, the major becomes far less important than the fact of having a degree (more to demonstrate some aptitude for learning and sticking with something than anything else - much of what you learned 10 years ago as a undergrad is irrelevant today anyway), and relevant industry experience.
There's also the Community College route... a 2-year associate's degree is still a degree, and can easily serve as a starting point for future education, as well. There's very little reason that people "can't" get an education if they want one. It may require some work, some prioritization, and some time management, but those are important skills that anybody should have, anyway. If you want a "career path" including some room for advancement and better-paying opportunities, having that degree is important, no matter what job you're in.
I think that this theory of yours suggests that you're an underachiever who is rationalizing his own underachievement as evidence of what a special little snowflake he is, rather than as a character flaw which is actively holding him back in life.
What do you think about this possibility, deep thinker?
Slashdot Mirror
Anybody *can* contribute to our current system of governance.
In fact, I'd suggest that, for the average person, there are far lower requirements for getting your input incorporated into your government's laws than it would be for the average person to sit down and submit a patch to the Linux kernel.
The former requires persistence and persuasiveness. The latter requires persistence and persuasiveness AND a lot of expertise, experience, and skill. I'm not so certain that "open source software" would benefit from the "anybody can submit anything they like" model you suggest is the norm.
There's a reason why the term "benevolent dictator" has been applied to the leads of many open source projects. It's not because of their permissive policies regarding commits to the main trunk.
If they made this the ONLY way for you to login, rather than an option, then perhaps you'd have a case.
Of course, since this augments the current login system and is in no way mandatory, maybe you should also talk to a lawyer about whether or not you have cause to sue a business owner who installs a wheelchair ramp AND stairs at the entrance to their business.
What I find amazing is how many people here suddenly have Facebook accounts that they're worrying about being locked out of. It seems that Slashdotters move from "WUT IS DIS I NEVAR?" status to "ZOMG I won't be able to log in! QUELLE HORREUR!" with amazing rapidity.
Yeah, they decided, the day after Zuckerberg's page was hacked, to turn on HTTPS across their entire server farm for all users.
Just like that - no planning, no analysis, no coordination, just a knee-jerk response.
The point he was making was that the president was trying to score funny points on it - and "pointing out something we all think," when it's his own administration that has foisted these new rules on us that he's cracking jokes about.
If Pres. Obama feels that these pat-downs are ridiculous and laughable, perhaps he should... oh, I don't know... direct his administration to change the requirement that calls for them?
You know, you could have spared us the inefficiency of reading all of your ranting, and simply condensed what you had to say down to its crucial emoticon essence:
:'(
Sounds like somebody's got a case of the Mondays. :(
Not in the least. You're suggesting that it's a brand of laziness that prevents people from building an effective team, and the underlying assumption there is that the guy without a degree is likely to be both the best candidate for the job, and the one most capable of doing it effectively.
I'm suggesting that that's a foolish assertion to make, because it's overwhelmingly likely that theres at least one person in that pile who is capable of doing the job just as effectively, and who holds a degree. This makes the degree criteria a useful criterion for an initial filter.
If you don't want to be filtered out, get a degree, or learn to network more effectively so you can bypass the filter process and get your resume in front of the hiring manager directly.
Yes, because nothing happens in any context of the broader conflict we're embroiled in. That video is the only battle American forces have seen in Iraq. They were just flying around Baghdad, saw some guys, and said "hey, let's kill those guys. It'll pass the time."
But your ignorant naievete is noted.
I'd say any place where there's a way you could make the functionality available through a reasonably clean web-like interface that doesn't require large amounts of raw text entry would be a suitable possibility, with bonus points if the solution's mobility and/or allowance for standing/walking while using it make life simpler for the user.
For instance, in the medical industry - diagnostic imaging ("let me pull up that x-ray from the database to look at it again..."), patient charts ("let me take a look at the notes the last doctor to talk to you here at the hospital entered..."), reference (medical conditions, drugs & medical).
Something as simple as retail order entry systems - small attachment to scan a bar code on a product or shelf, then enter the number of items to order. I know a store I worked at had a fairly convoluted ordering system that involved small handheld bar code scanners that we had to wander around the store with, and if you screwed up the entry, or batteries died, you could have to restart your order from the start... scan the wrong code, or get a bad scan, and sometimes end up with a large number of the wrong item... A tablet for entering that data with a display of the product you just scanned, plus easy quantity entry, plus perhaps a centralization feature to make sure that two people doing ordering don't both order 5 of the same product. Order done, review & send immediately from the device.
Basically, think of everything people do with small portable computers today, or have to sit at a desk in front of a desktop today, and ask "Does it need to be done that way?" A desktop computer isn't always the most efficient or convenient method for accomplishing things.
I read what you wrote, and it certainly seems that you're suggesting that we should be concerned about the Pope's announcements when you write, for instance:
"If you think that a proclamation of Jihad from the Vatican wouldn't motivate thousands of lunatics to go out and murder, rape, and pillage, you're a fool."
Considering that "jihad" in the current vernacular is almost exclusively prosecuted by *radicals* who in no way represent even a fragment of the mainstream of the religion they claim to be waging jihad on behalf of, to suggest that:
1) The Pope, as the head of the Catholic religion, might issue such a proclamation in 2011;
2) That any significant number of people would take it seriously if he did;
Is just foolish.
And the likelihood of any given person dying at the hands of a Pope-sponsored jihad? Certainly lower than your chances of dying to terrorism.
So why is it okay to live in fear of the Pope, but foolish to live in fear of dying to terrorism?
There are numerous self-styled smart dudes here who would be hasten to point out that many of our anti-terror measures are pointless, and we're wasting money and time on counteracting a threat that, on a societal scale, is fairly minor. But the fact that the Pope *could* influence a handful of Catholics if he declared a jihad is somehow something to be worried about?
Yes, actually for the company I work for, the retraining and support costs associated with migrating to newer versions of Office has specifically been the factor cited in delaying that upgrade to investigate alternatives. It's also the reason we skipped upgrading to Vista and decided to stay on XP while pushing more Linux adoption across the enterprise, and also the reason why we *just* got upgraded to IE8, but have been able to download and install a corporate-sanctioned (and, in fact, "recommended except for the internal intranet sites that require IE") version of Firefox 3 for nearly 2 years now.
I know you're trying to make some point that FOSS is somehow less subject to these things than proprietary software, but that's simply not the case. When there are major changes and shifts in the technology and the strategy of ANY piece of software you use, you should re-evaluate its use to make sure that you are still going in the same direction strategically.
If you notice, I *did* say in my first sentence that all of these caveats are "not concerns that are specific to FOSS software."
Yeah, because hiring developers to work for you on customizing and supporting that software long-term isn't expensive at all. Building a consortium of "other businesses in the same boat" is also not a zero-cost operation. FOSS doesn't solve all of the problems of software any more than proprietary software does. So you choose the best tool for the job you need to do, and you re-evaluate whether or not the hammer you've been using for a few years is still the right solution when somebody suggests that it's going to be turned into a sledgehammer soon, and you do the same when somebody suggests that the sledgehammer you use today should be redesigned as a 16-ounce claw hammer next year.
So if the only person is the one without a degree, then you are left with a pool of zero candidates to submit to the hiring manager. What happens then?
What happens is that they'll loosen the filter criteria and send resumes of people who "almost" meet the requirements, and the person without the degree but all of the relevant experience will most likely be in that batch. If there's a bunch of "almost-qualifieds", and you're the only one without a degree, you're at a disadvantage.
Even if there are only two suitable people in that looser-requirements batch... and one has a degree, and the other doesn't - they're both suitable, neither quite meet the full letter of the requirements, but they're both close: who's got the edge?
When the requirement reads:
"BS in Computer Science or equivalent," and you don't have a BS in Computer Science... that will significantly *decrease* your chances of getting an interview if your only path into the company is through the HR recruiter.
It is insurance against being disqualified, and those thousands of dollars you're spending now are an investment in future earnings. You're actually pretty lucky that your employer is encouraging you to get your degree, and subsidizing a good portion of it. Not a lot of people are so lucky.
If you're 30 years old, and expect to have your home paid off by 2016, then you are socking far more money into your mortgage than you strictly need to, assuming you bought your house even twelve years ago at age 18. And if you're paying down your mortgage at the expense of fully funding your retirement savings, then you should really go talk to a financial advisor, as delaying or shorting your retirement savings to pay down low-interest investment debt (your mortgage) is generally a bad idea. Model the scenario out even at relatively low rates of return, and you'll see that a few extra years paying into a 401k or IRA or similar can make huge differences in the money you'll end up with at the end of the next 20-30 years.
So you don't meet all of the criteria I laid out, and I suspect that a huge majority of people who would say "I'm a Catholic" that reads that question cannot honestly say that they fulfill those three simple criteria.
My point is not to bash Catholics or call them bad Catholics, but how much influence over your day-to-day behavior can anybody really believe the Pope has over you, if you don't even go to Church once a week? According to the church, regular mass attendance is very important because that's where you receive the sacrament of communion, one of the more important bits of being a Catholic... if the Pope really had the influence over behavior as is being suggested, I'd expect that Catholics would be there every week without fail.
anti-Judaic? anti-Islamic? Right here on Slashdot. Go back and read about the Israel/Palestine peace talk leaks. There's a lot of quite nasty rhetoric going both ways from people who claim to be disinterested parties.
You seem to think that the only person saying nasty things about other religions is Christians. You're quite wrong. This doesn't excuse the Christians who *are* spouting nonsense, but it applies equally well to anybody of any religious orientation.
Yeah, find me a Catholic under the age of 40 who refuses to eat meat on a Friday during Lent, and who goes to church every Sunday.
The Pope has far less direct influence over the actions of most Catholics than you seem to think.
Actually, if the Pope said that in 2011, he would be roundly ignored, other than to have a bunch of Catholics around the world go, "Um.... no?"
I agree, there is no justification for cold blooded murder.
What you seem to be missing here is that this was not cold blooded murder.
I was reiterating my response to alvinrod above. Your criticism is technically accurate, but completely irrelevant to this particular event.
You assume that in the pile of 300 resumes, there is only ONE person who could possibly do the job "effectively." You also suggest that the one person who could do the job is likely to be MORE suited to the job based on their lack of a degree.
In fact, it's likely that several dozen of them could be perfectly adequate employees. If 20 of them have all the prereqs you've asked for, PLUS a degree, and 1 doesn't, that 1 person is still "lacking something" that the other candidate has.
If you don't consider the earning potential of the rest of your career worth a few thousand dollars in debt to get the piece of paper as insurance, then there is something oddly skewed with your priorities.
You're right. I have a degree in Biology. I work as a software engineer. I worked with a history major, who was also a software engineer. I also work with a guy who got his undergrad degree in french literature. No lie.
A non-engineering / non-computer-science degree certainly doesn't help in the computer field, but once you've gotten your foot in the door and a few years of experience under your belt, the major becomes far less important than the fact of having a degree (more to demonstrate some aptitude for learning and sticking with something than anything else - much of what you learned 10 years ago as a undergrad is irrelevant today anyway), and relevant industry experience.
There's also the Community College route... a 2-year associate's degree is still a degree, and can easily serve as a starting point for future education, as well. There's very little reason that people "can't" get an education if they want one. It may require some work, some prioritization, and some time management, but those are important skills that anybody should have, anyway. If you want a "career path" including some room for advancement and better-paying opportunities, having that degree is important, no matter what job you're in.
I think that this theory of yours suggests that you're an underachiever who is rationalizing his own underachievement as evidence of what a special little snowflake he is, rather than as a character flaw which is actively holding him back in life.
What do you think about this possibility, deep thinker?
Care to cite a shred of evidence that supports this negative correlation you're suggesting?