Several of the most rigorous and useful classes I took were not STEM.
My fear is that the inverse of your situation, an art major that has to take a few math and science classes, puts the future of our country at a far greater risk. You can gain enough soft skills in communication, management, creative thinking, etc in a few courses, it doesn't require a 4 year degree to become competent. My personal opinion is that it would be far better to have a glut of underutilized engineers than have a glut of over-extended history majors.
I would also agree with you, I had a creative writing course that I have benefited from immensely. But that's not to say I would have replaced any of my EE courses with Advanced Creative Writing.
Have you never actually shipped a package? They may not open every package (or any package), but when you are tendering items for shipment you are agreeing to their terms and conditions, which expressly state what you are and are not allowed to ship.
They all say something to the affect of "no illegal or dangerous items". FedEx is saying "Our lawyers haven't figured out if this CNC mill that is marketed with the express purpose of manufacturing weapons is legal or not, so we aren't going to ship it." What's the problem? They are a private company that has a published set of terms and conditions.
Not that I am in agreement with the whole "we need the keys to the kingdom" mentality, but there is a problem with your "demand the keys" argument. The gov't, via the 5th amendment, is not able to compel you to turn over the keys (in this case the "keys" are a password). Even if there were legal precedent to allow that, what are they going to do with the "I lost my keys" ("I can't remember my password") response? Beat it out of you?
Again, I'm not saying I support this, I'm just curious what the thoughts are on how access is obtained once legal permission is given?
I was driving on a 4 lane road in the left hand lane in fairly busy traffic going slightly but not grossly faster than the speed limit.. Some absolute idiot was tailgating me because he seemed to think I was in his way...So I slowed down to the speed limit, which just enraged the idiot behind me. The truck driver noticed this little drama and slowed down too. Nothing like road justice I suppose.
Let's go through those one at a time:
So, you were already breaking the law (traveling over the speed limit). Somebody wanted to break the law more than you (getting on your ass for not going fast enough). So you switched breaking one law for breaking another (not overtaking someone while in the passing lane). Then colluded with another driver with the express purpose of being an asshole?
Yup, CLEARLY the other driver is 100% at fault.
The tailgater's behavior in the entire encounter was unacceptable, but what exactly did your actions do to make the situation any safer? Do you think your "road justice" did anything to correct his future driving habits? Or do you think the adult thing to do would have been to continue breaking the law for another 30 seconds, or heaven forbid drive 2 MPH faster than you currently were, then get the fuck out of his way?
And I take ginseng regularly for various personal reasons. I can state with some confidence that I don't believe it's a placebo effect
I can't tell if you're trying to be funny or serious. Your statement just defined what the placebo effect is.
Placebo effect: Also called the placebo response. A remarkable phenomenon in which a placebo -- a fake treatment, an inactive substance like sugar, distilled water, or saline solution -- can sometimes improve a patient's condition simply because the person has the expectation that it will be helpful.
I drink water regularly, for various obvious reasons. And I can state with some confidence that I can do math better after drinking water, because I think I can do math better after I drink water. And after drinking water regularly for many years, I still think I can do math better after drinking water. So drinking water must increase math skills, based on my personal experience.
It's the same theory as a gold rush. The guy selling buckets and shovels is going to make more money than 99% of the people that go there to dig up gold.
I would think that most admins are going to look a little deeper than marketing material when they are selecting a product. Marketing material is great for a first pass, but I'd think speaking to a sales rep, and eventually some technical people would be par for the course.
I know, I know, you can go on TechNet and find anything you want. Do you really think that Amazon doesn't have similar documentation stashed around somewhere?
That's a funny joke. I tried the snapshot. What a fucking joke. Three cars: Me, 20 mile daily rush hour commute. Wife, 15 mile "off peak" daily commute. Daughter, car literally sat in the driveway for the three months, with the exception of 2 trips from Minneapolis to Fargo and an occasional trip to the gas station around the corner. Me: 0% (ok, I expected that.) Wife: 3%, daughter 3%. Seriously? What do you have to do to get their 30%?
Isn't that why you bring in experts to explain in, non-IT, terms what the purpose of TOR is? The jurors don't have to know how a gun works to be able to decide if it was used illegally or not. Now, if we are deciding whether or not the evidence was collected legally or not, that's a different story. And that isn't a decision made by the jurors. Which leads to my complaint: You have a huge problem if you have an inept judge that cannot understand the technical aspects of the evidence involved, to determine if it is admissible or not.
If you think that there is ever such a thing as a "free ER visit" you are delusional.
Yeah, they are required to treat you even if you don't have the "ability to pay", if you have a life threatening condition. But you can be god damn sure they are going to do everything in their power to extract their money out of you, regardless of your "ability to pay". They have no qualms about suing somebody making significantly less than the poverty line and garnishing their wages. What? Don't have a job? Don't worry, they will wait till you get one, then the collectors will come say hi.
So your argument about it being a "non-issue" is the same argument as mine? Because you think it's a non-issue? Compelling.
Find me a "reasonable person" on here that thinks it makes sense that you need tools, a half hour, and contortionist abilities to change a damn headlight.
If I'm driving in the dark in snow a storm I want both low-beams on. It's not a "convenience" thing, it's a safety concern. If you're cool driving around with impaired ability to see what's in front of you, giver 'er hell. I'm not cool with it. Period. And again, needing to lay in the snow to change a light bulb IS A BAD FUCKING DESIGN.
The one in the trunk is likely to fail from rattling around in the trunk.
You must get off on pedantry. Fine, put the fucker in the glove box where it isn't going to bounce around.
And regardless of whether I had a spare bulb, I'd never stop on the side of the road to change it, I'd just drive on the remaining light until a more convenient time.
Definitely your prerogative. Some people would make a different choice, especially when a "more convenient time" could involve many hours worth of driving. Which leads me back to my original point, again. Changing it out shouldn't require tools.
Headlights should be replaced in pairs. If one went out, the other is (more than likely) shortly behind it.
Who said anything about needing to acquire them in bulk? Buy a two pack, replace them both, put the spare in the trunk. Why is that such a hard concept?
Who the heck replaces a headlight on the side of the road in the dark?
The guy on a late night long distance trip in the middle of nowhere that happens to keep a spare bulb in the trunk?
they do come in pairs
I know. That's why I have a spare in my trunk, because when I replaced the pair I put the old non-burned out one in the package and put it in my trunk. Ya know, so I have a spare bulb if one burns out while I'm in the middle of nowhere in the middle of the night.
But, back to my original point, if you want something more realistic: If you can't replace a headlight bulb by yourself with zero tools and without crawling on the ground, your design is broken.
Agreed. Owner of a 2010 Subaru Legacy. When the second line of instructions (after "remove these three fasteners") is something to the effect of "Pry the inner fender well out of the way", your design sucks.
If you can't replace a headlight bulb on the side of the road, in the dark, by yourself, with zero tools and without crawling on the ground, your design is broken.
For standard oil I would tend to agree with you. It's hard to buy all of the components necessary for the 19.95 (or whatever) that wal*mart (or whatever) charges. The trouble is when you go to get a synthetic oil change the price doubles or triples. I can find a 5qt jug of good synthetic and an oil filter for less than 30 most of the time.
The half hour of my time, an hour if you count the trip to the auto parts store, is well worth it to know exactly what was done to my car. I've heard too many horror stories about what happens in those oil change places.
Often people in the interview chain were tech school, or self-taught pedantic types, and they especially don't like theorists or those that can run circles around algorithm, logic, and design questions. These kind of interviews happened to me several times before I finally learned the disgusting practice of dumbing myself down, not showing off, and playing nice with those people
In my experience, taking the initiative to spend a little unforced time to go politely beyond the question at the white-board, and demonstrate a deeper understanding, after answering the question, is not being pompous or arrogant. This is the exact activity that has got me in trouble.
Can you see how you could possibly come across as arrogant? Those two statements are both yours, and they both say essentially the same thing. Attitude 1 gets shown the door, attitude 2 probably gets a second interview.
My only other thought... You have incredibly valid points, most people don't like being told they are dumb. If you are asked to dissect some code, it was most likely written by one of the interviewers and they are probably particularly proud of it. (they aren't going to display some crap they hacked together 5 years ago) Showing them intricate ways to improve it, even if they are completely valid, isn't going to earn you brownie points. Prove that you understand the concept, debug their intentional fuck-up, answer whatever the question is, and move on. Wait till you get hired to prove what an idiot the guy who wrote it is.
Often people in the interview chain were tech school, or self-taught pedantic types, and they especially don't like theorists or those that can run circles around algorithm, logic, and design questions. These kind of interviews happened to me several times before I finally learned the disgusting practice of dumbing myself down, not showing off, and playing nice with those people
Or, maybe, experienced established professionals don't appreciate punk know-it-all showoffs coming into an interview with the goal of proving how much smarter than everybody else they are? With the attitude that you expressed in your post I wouldn't hire you either. Not for a programming position, or a janitor. Nobody likes working with a pompous asshole.
Slashdot Mirror
Several of the most rigorous and useful classes I took were not STEM.
My fear is that the inverse of your situation, an art major that has to take a few math and science classes, puts the future of our country at a far greater risk. You can gain enough soft skills in communication, management, creative thinking, etc in a few courses, it doesn't require a 4 year degree to become competent. My personal opinion is that it would be far better to have a glut of underutilized engineers than have a glut of over-extended history majors.
I would also agree with you, I had a creative writing course that I have benefited from immensely. But that's not to say I would have replaced any of my EE courses with Advanced Creative Writing.
"Laser Internet Drones" Am I the only one that read this as a really good way to prevent trolls on Facebook?
They all say something to the affect of "no illegal or dangerous items". FedEx is saying "Our lawyers haven't figured out if this CNC mill that is marketed with the express purpose of manufacturing weapons is legal or not, so we aren't going to ship it." What's the problem? They are a private company that has a published set of terms and conditions.
Again, I'm not saying I support this, I'm just curious what the thoughts are on how access is obtained once legal permission is given?
I was driving on a 4 lane road in the left hand lane in fairly busy traffic going slightly but not grossly faster than the speed limit.. Some absolute idiot was tailgating me because he seemed to think I was in his way...So I slowed down to the speed limit, which just enraged the idiot behind me. The truck driver noticed this little drama and slowed down too. Nothing like road justice I suppose.
Let's go through those one at a time: So, you were already breaking the law (traveling over the speed limit). Somebody wanted to break the law more than you (getting on your ass for not going fast enough). So you switched breaking one law for breaking another (not overtaking someone while in the passing lane). Then colluded with another driver with the express purpose of being an asshole?
Yup, CLEARLY the other driver is 100% at fault.
The tailgater's behavior in the entire encounter was unacceptable, but what exactly did your actions do to make the situation any safer? Do you think your "road justice" did anything to correct his future driving habits? Or do you think the adult thing to do would have been to continue breaking the law for another 30 seconds, or heaven forbid drive 2 MPH faster than you currently were, then get the fuck out of his way?
And I take ginseng regularly for various personal reasons. I can state with some confidence that I don't believe it's a placebo effect
I can't tell if you're trying to be funny or serious. Your statement just defined what the placebo effect is.
Placebo effect: Also called the placebo response. A remarkable phenomenon in which a placebo -- a fake treatment, an inactive substance like sugar, distilled water, or saline solution -- can sometimes improve a patient's condition simply because the person has the expectation that it will be helpful.
I drink water regularly, for various obvious reasons. And I can state with some confidence that I can do math better after drinking water, because I think I can do math better after I drink water. And after drinking water regularly for many years, I still think I can do math better after drinking water. So drinking water must increase math skills, based on my personal experience.
It's the same theory as a gold rush. The guy selling buckets and shovels is going to make more money than 99% of the people that go there to dig up gold.
Btw, here is Microsoft's Advertized "details" (they call theirs "Top Features") for exchange: http://products.office.com/en-...
I know, I know, you can go on TechNet and find anything you want. Do you really think that Amazon doesn't have similar documentation stashed around somewhere?
I had visions of sending serial data by balloon, I get here and it's an article about science... What a crock.
so if you pay $500 for a widget, and someone else pays $100 for the same widget, yours is provably better
When your "widget" is a congressman, and your dollar value has a few more zeros on it, it is most certainly "the more you pay the more you get".
savings
That's a funny joke. I tried the snapshot. What a fucking joke. Three cars: Me, 20 mile daily rush hour commute. Wife, 15 mile "off peak" daily commute. Daughter, car literally sat in the driveway for the three months, with the exception of 2 trips from Minneapolis to Fargo and an occasional trip to the gas station around the corner. Me: 0% (ok, I expected that.) Wife: 3%, daughter 3%. Seriously? What do you have to do to get their 30%?
Yeah, looks like they came in a little hot, and slightly off-kilter.
Isn't that why you bring in experts to explain in, non-IT, terms what the purpose of TOR is? The jurors don't have to know how a gun works to be able to decide if it was used illegally or not. Now, if we are deciding whether or not the evidence was collected legally or not, that's a different story. And that isn't a decision made by the jurors. Which leads to my complaint: You have a huge problem if you have an inept judge that cannot understand the technical aspects of the evidence involved, to determine if it is admissible or not.
If you think that there is ever such a thing as a "free ER visit" you are delusional. Yeah, they are required to treat you even if you don't have the "ability to pay", if you have a life threatening condition. But you can be god damn sure they are going to do everything in their power to extract their money out of you, regardless of your "ability to pay". They have no qualms about suing somebody making significantly less than the poverty line and garnishing their wages. What? Don't have a job? Don't worry, they will wait till you get one, then the collectors will come say hi.
Find me a "reasonable person" on here that thinks it makes sense that you need tools, a half hour, and contortionist abilities to change a damn headlight.
If I'm driving in the dark in snow a storm I want both low-beams on. It's not a "convenience" thing, it's a safety concern. If you're cool driving around with impaired ability to see what's in front of you, giver 'er hell. I'm not cool with it. Period. And again, needing to lay in the snow to change a light bulb IS A BAD FUCKING DESIGN.
The one in the trunk is likely to fail from rattling around in the trunk.
You must get off on pedantry. Fine, put the fucker in the glove box where it isn't going to bounce around.
And regardless of whether I had a spare bulb, I'd never stop on the side of the road to change it, I'd just drive on the remaining light until a more convenient time.
Definitely your prerogative. Some people would make a different choice, especially when a "more convenient time" could involve many hours worth of driving. Which leads me back to my original point, again. Changing it out shouldn't require tools.
Who said anything about needing to acquire them in bulk? Buy a two pack, replace them both, put the spare in the trunk. Why is that such a hard concept?
Who the heck replaces a headlight on the side of the road in the dark?
The guy on a late night long distance trip in the middle of nowhere that happens to keep a spare bulb in the trunk?
they do come in pairs
I know. That's why I have a spare in my trunk, because when I replaced the pair I put the old non-burned out one in the package and put it in my trunk. Ya know, so I have a spare bulb if one burns out while I'm in the middle of nowhere in the middle of the night.
But, back to my original point, if you want something more realistic: If you can't replace a headlight bulb by yourself with zero tools and without crawling on the ground, your design is broken.
Incidentally... bullshit.
Agreed. Owner of a 2010 Subaru Legacy. When the second line of instructions (after "remove these three fasteners") is something to the effect of "Pry the inner fender well out of the way", your design sucks.
If you can't replace a headlight bulb on the side of the road, in the dark, by yourself, with zero tools and without crawling on the ground, your design is broken.
The half hour of my time, an hour if you count the trip to the auto parts store, is well worth it to know exactly what was done to my car. I've heard too many horror stories about what happens in those oil change places.
Often people in the interview chain were tech school, or self-taught pedantic types, and they especially don't like theorists or those that can run circles around algorithm, logic, and design questions. These kind of interviews happened to me several times before I finally learned the disgusting practice of dumbing myself down, not showing off, and playing nice with those people
In my experience, taking the initiative to spend a little unforced time to go politely beyond the question at the white-board, and demonstrate a deeper understanding, after answering the question, is not being pompous or arrogant. This is the exact activity that has got me in trouble.
Can you see how you could possibly come across as arrogant? Those two statements are both yours, and they both say essentially the same thing. Attitude 1 gets shown the door, attitude 2 probably gets a second interview.
My only other thought... You have incredibly valid points, most people don't like being told they are dumb. If you are asked to dissect some code, it was most likely written by one of the interviewers and they are probably particularly proud of it. (they aren't going to display some crap they hacked together 5 years ago) Showing them intricate ways to improve it, even if they are completely valid, isn't going to earn you brownie points. Prove that you understand the concept, debug their intentional fuck-up, answer whatever the question is, and move on. Wait till you get hired to prove what an idiot the guy who wrote it is.
Often people in the interview chain were tech school, or self-taught pedantic types, and they especially don't like theorists or those that can run circles around algorithm, logic, and design questions. These kind of interviews happened to me several times before I finally learned the disgusting practice of dumbing myself down, not showing off, and playing nice with those people
Or, maybe, experienced established professionals don't appreciate punk know-it-all showoffs coming into an interview with the goal of proving how much smarter than everybody else they are? With the attitude that you expressed in your post I wouldn't hire you either. Not for a programming position, or a janitor. Nobody likes working with a pompous asshole.
If the CEO of PepsiCo follows Coke will it negatively affect Pepsi in some way? I just don't see it.
Better than feeding her a live-rat sandwich...
My wife and I took over 7000 pictures on our honeymoon (which lasted about a month)
You guys took about 15 pictures/hour on your honeymoon? (assuming 8 hours/day of sleep)
When did you guys find time to fuck?