Comment On The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

The Mandatory Three (from Jim) After the dot com bust, I spent a lot of time interviewing. It was mostly dead ends or companies that were only willing to hire one person to do the job of four (specifically, the four that they had just laid off). A friend of mine who worked at a school, told me about an IT position there. Being out of work for so long, I was very eager to get in for an interview, and figured I might have an "in" since he was working there already. [expand full text]
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4Next »

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 14:53 • by Asiago Chow (unregistered)
231138 in reply to 231118
Code Dependent:
Asiago Chow:
Living alone is just another vice.
Not according to the apostle Paul. 1 Corinthians 7:7 -- "I would like everyone to be unmarried, like I am."


I'm not sure what qualifications Paul had to discuss human needs...none as far as I know...but his likes do not define vice. Anyway, unmarried does not mean alone. He may have lived with 50 guys for all any of us know.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 15:05 • by TopCod3rsBottom
231140 in reply to 231011
Non-serious coder:
Shush! Dont tell them how to sort out the serious (i.e "all I want in life is to code!") coders from the non-serious (i.e "I like coding, but i also like other things").. ;)
Uh, "serious coder" doesn't mean "likes to code more than anything else". It means, "knows that finding an item in a hash table is O(1), finding in a balanced tree is O(ln n), and finding in a linked list is O(n)". It means a whole lot more as well, but that's a good start, given my experiences interviewing developers.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 15:08 • by asdfasf (unregistered)
Reminder to self: Don't skip to page 4 from page 1 unless you want to be totally confused.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 16:01 • by Jo Bob (unregistered)
231148 in reply to 231141
asdfasf:
Reminder to self: Don't skip to page 4 from page 1 unless you want to be totally confused.

The title did say the "The Mandatory Three", people just took that to mean three (wildly diverging) threads running at once. ;-)

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 16:27 • by Code Dependent
231155 in reply to 231138
Asiago Chow:
I'm not sure what qualifications Paul had to discuss human needs...none as far as I know...but his likes do not define vice.
Theoretically (or perhaps, theologically), his qualifications would be due to having been anointed by holy spirit, and thereby having special knowledge given him by the creator of humankind. Me being agnostic, I don't insist upon the factualness of that belief; but some folks do, and Paul's authority overrides their own. I was curious to see your reaction.

Noting that everything I've quoted above applies to you, I'll tip my hat and bow out now... I'm within minutes of embarking on a four-day weekend, and I'm too content to wrestle with inanities.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 16:46 • by JJ (unregistered)
231158 in reply to 230990
Franz Kafka:
The idea of a living wage is that someone who's worth employing is worth paying enough that they aren't eternally a hair's breadth from starvation. This doesn't mean that they have a glamorous life on minimum wage, but they do get enough to eat, a safe place to sleep, and some money left over that can be used for some sort of luxury - going out a couple times per month or something like that. Nowhere in there is the notion that money above subsistence + epsilon should be taken and given to others, just that starving masses are a bad idea all round.


It's a forced, government solution that creates as many problems as it purports to solve. It's also inappropriate for many positions: do teenagers and elderly looking for supplemental income really need a "living wage?" Who determines what it is? Why not make it $50 per hour? Should it include enough to survive on, or enough to survive on plus cable TV and a tricked-up Honda CRX? Where does it end?

There's way too much hubris in suggesting that government could actually do a good job in this area, based on lots and lots of past experience. The best thing for all concerned would be for government to get out of the welfare business, and put humans back into the equation. Were the government not to suck up to 40% of income (and then spend a tiny fraction of that on the people who really need it), I warrant many of us would do much more than tithe to the truly needy. Cut out the middleman! Especially when the middleman is a greedy, crooked, power-hungry enterprise/system like the government.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 18:35 • by Georgy Porgy (unregistered)
Well don't skim over the fact that it was a "dyanamic" intranet site. It surely had interactive links and/or animated GIF's.

Re: Always listen to the job title!

2008-11-26 19:22 • by Shill (unregistered)
231176 in reply to 230898
Heron:
Jay Jay:
Seeing as how it just generated function stubs, I told him that, according to the requirements I had been given, it was a waste of time. Useful for spec'ing out a project, but absolute crap as far as generating code. I gave it a failing grade, once again based upon what had been requested of me.

Turns out that he had preemptively purchased a corporate license and just needed a positive recommendation for his boss (a member of VERY high management) to sign off on it. My failing grade made it (and him) look bad.


I'm in charge of IT at my company now, but I used to work on a programming team. I parted from that team on bad terms with the my former manager (he fired me, a story for another time). He e-mailed me three months ago asking whether a particular 4GB kit of RAM (OCZ Fatal1ty) would be appropriate for three of his development machines.

I responded that because our software did not even compile in 64-bit, and we weren't currently running 64-bit OSes on two of the machines, it would not be useful to get extra RAM, and that getting our software actually <i>compiling</i> in 64-bit (a task that, three months later, is not even close to completion) is a higher priority than buying more RAM.

The response I got was perhaps the rudest e-mail I've ever received, and I'll reproduce it here in its brief entirety:

We are working on a 64-bit version. I don't care if you think I am wasting "my teams money". Tell me if either of these items of RAM would be appropriate for my, John and Blair's computers. I don't want your opinion about whether or not it is the right purchase or the right time.


I'm not sure why he put the phrase "my teams money" in quotes, because I never mentioned its price at all (perhaps he already knew the RAM was more expensive than necessary?). In any case, what I think is funny is that he says "tell me if they're appropriate" and "I don't want your opinion" back-to-back. Isn't whether the RAM is useful integral to whether the RAM is appropriate for the machines?

This particular manager has a habit of being extremely rude unless his subordinates (or people he views as subordinates) do exactly as he wishes, even if what he wants is useless or even counterproductive.

Oh, ironically, he bought the RAM anyway, and it doesn't even work in one of the machines (bluescreens galore). As a result, my opinion carries more weight right now than it used to...


In other words, if you had done your job instead of trying to do his, he wouldn't have wasted money on equipment that doesn't work.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 19:38 • by blunder (unregistered)
231177 in reply to 230925
Lumberjack:
Experience in XML? It's tags, people! Tags! As in <tag></tag>. What kind of "experience" are we talking about here? Knowing where to find the angle bracket on a keyboard?


I really hope that when the time comes for you to use XML, you actually take the time to learn about things like the DTD, rather than hard code some god-awful mess of angle brackets.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 19:45 • by Asiago Chow (unregistered)
231179 in reply to 231155
Code Dependent:
Theoretically (or perhaps, theologically), [Paul's] qualifications would be due to having been anointed by holy spirit, and thereby having special knowledge given him by the creator of humankind. Me being agnostic, I don't insist upon the factualness of that belief; but some folks do, and Paul's authority overrides their own. I was curious to see your reaction.


Huh. Well, being an atheist myself I don't have much truck with anointment by mythical agencies...but I guess some do. Such is life.


Noting that everything I've quoted above applies to you, I'll tip my hat and bow out now... I'm within minutes of embarking on a four-day weekend, and I'm too content to wrestle with inanities.


Enjoy your weekend! But I will offer this parting shot: I'm not saying I dislike living wages, living alone, or anything else I've mentioned. I'm certainly not saying that I'm any sort of authority whose likes should control the behavior of others. I'm saying that certain things cause harm, the harm can be (and has been) measured, and ethically we are have a responsibility to minimize harm and maximize happiness. A living wage does neither. Your attempt to equate my statements with the likes or dislikes of Paul are incorrect because paul wasn't saying "we've done research and our research shows that, statistically, people who get married are worse off than people who are single like me so everyone should stay single." Had he done that research his findings would have been just the opposite -- marriage increases happiness, lifespan, and wealth. We as a society have done the research and our policy should be based on our best knowledge...not on some fuzzy feel good or religious ideal.

The "Living Wage" is not based on our best knowledge. It is based on a quasi-religious "fairness" ideal. Idealism has its place but NOT in public policy.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 19:48 • by Spudd86 (unregistered)
231180 in reply to 230843
Two weeks for a Priority Queue? more like a few hours...

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 20:56 • by Code Dependent
231189 in reply to 231179
Asiago Chow:
I'm saying that certain things cause harm, the harm can be (and has been) measured, and ethically we are have a responsibility to minimize harm and maximize happiness.
I've seen the reports from the studies. I've been married twice and lived with three other women besides. I'm at a fairly ripe semi-old age, and I assure you, my happiest days, and years, have been those when I lived alone. Reports and statistics change. Coffee used to be bad for you; now it's good for you. Sugar, butter... same thing. Statistically, black people used to be dumber then whites; statistically, women used to be dumber than men. Atheist, put your faith in those statistics.

I'm not female, but a couple of females summed up my position very well. In a paraphrase of Katherine Hepburn, K.T. Oslin sang:

I love ya baby
I like your company
You make me laugh, You never make me cry
I think you're sexy
I like to kiss ya
Even my dog thinks you're quite a guy

I'm not looking for a husband
Found out the hard way that doesn't work for me
I need a friend
I want a lover
I have to be alone occasionally

So live close by, visit often
That'll work, that'll work for me
Live close by, visit often
Save us both a lot of misery

You fix me breakfast
I'll buy you dinner
We'll hit a movie on Wednesday night
You go to your place
I'll go to my place
Sounds like our plan is gonna work just right

It could be rough
It could be easy
It might be hell, might be heavenly
How do you feel?
How does it strike ya?
Could you be happy with a woman like me?

Why don't ya? Why don't ya
Live close by, visit often
That'll work, that'll work for me
Live close by, visit often
Save us both a lot of misery

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 22:04 • by Jonathan Wilson (unregistered)
231259 in reply to 230882
The question is, why do IT companies bother with agencies in the first place. What do these recruitment firms do that the company with the available position is unable to do themselves?

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-26 23:39 • by Shinobu (unregistered)
Ooh... I know how to solve the filler applicants thing! Just let the filling of all such vacancies be overseen by specially appointed 15-head strong committees from the Department of Administrative Affairs. What could possibly go wrong?

On a different note... ‘Fallacious doesn't mean wrong.’ It means the reasoning behind it is wrong. Granted, sometimes people arrive at the right answer by accident, but most of the time they don't. Asiago Chow, you appear to have no relevant subject knowledge anyway, but even if you had, your disrespect for logical reasoning would still make your opinions as useless to me as the outcome of a diceroll.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-27 11:38 • by dv (unregistered)
231310 in reply to 231267
Come on... give the guy a standing chance and point the fallacies in his argument out for the dumber of us. Pretty please. The only (hardly invalidating) fallacy I can see in his argument is the non sequitur here and there, but the main argument is solid.
Also please note that he didn't try to ad hominem you, or anyone else, for that matter;-)

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-27 19:09 • by asdfasf (unregistered)
231328 in reply to 231177
blunder:
Lumberjack:
Experience in XML? It's tags, people! Tags! As in <tag></tag>. What kind of "experience" are we talking about here? Knowing where to find the angle bracket on a keyboard?


I really hope that when the time comes for you to use XML, you actually take the time to learn about things like the DTD, rather than hard code some god-awful mess of angle brackets.
Yes, because making a DTD requires a PHD. Or even more than, say, four brain cells.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-27 19:52 • by akappa (unregistered)
231332 in reply to 230820
It's sad that the only thing you retained is also wrong: "Mi piacciono le tue tette"!

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-28 03:08 • by Cookie (unregistered)
231350 in reply to 230925
Experience in XML? It's tags, people! Tags! As in <tag></tag>. What kind of "experience" are we talking about here? Knowing where to find the angle bracket on a keyboard?


You haven't lived until you got stuck in a project creating an interface to a database using XML. Inside of base64. Inside SOAP. Inside XML (again). Then the usual http, tcp, ip, etc.

Best thing? The "documentation" conveniently forgot to mention at least a layer and a half of that little stack of horrors --the base64 requirement showed up as an unexplained inner bit of example message painted green in a clarification pdf (at request, originally word), and I'm not even mentioning encoding failures like

<items>
<name>...</name><value>...</value>
<name>...</name><value>...</value>
[and so on]
</items>

XML is turd polish on top of general inability to design feasible protocols. Yes, you can make perfectly feasible protocols with it, but you can do as well and more efficiently so without. What it tries to do is shuffle the need for protocol design skills under the carpet. No, it's not working. Whodathot?

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-28 03:19 • by Cookie (unregistered)
My experience with recruiters is that they don't have much ability to understand what's mentioned in the CV, including those who "specialise" in the IT field, and don't actually know what they're looking at beyond some vgreping. Doesn't help they see far too many CVs each day, many of which are chock full of buzzwords but with enough spelling errors and technical conflict to scream "fake" to anybody with a modicum of actual skill, of course.

I've had one complain I have "not enough unix" on my CV. My explanation that FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and various flavours of linux should count just as much as hp-ux, AIX, and Solaris fell on deaf ears. The verdict remained "not enough unix" and that was that.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-28 21:47 • by parris
231761 in reply to 230817
So what you are saying is that you don't reward honesty in résumés. You just want another carefully weasel-worded, buzzword-compliant, boring résumé.

That'd be TRWTF.
Amen!

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-29 17:00 • by furlong (unregistered)
231846 in reply to 230820
And it's not even right. In Italian you'd say "Mi piacciono le tue tette" (plural form of the verb).

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-29 17:00 • by furlong (unregistered)
231847 in reply to 231846
furlong:
And it's not even right. In Italian you'd say "Mi piacciono le tue tette" (plural form of the verb).


And it's not even right. In Italian you'd say "Mi piacciono le tue tette" (plural form of the verb).

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-11-30 04:52 • by Will (unregistered)
231882 in reply to 230817
As someone who's hired and fired before, I can say that honesty is appreciated; if I had time, I might hang out with the guy. But better to be honest that you shouldn't be given a job than pretend that you're qualified and fake it till you (don't) make it.

Unqualified people will get fired eventually anyway.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-12-02 07:47 • by Bel'moki (unregistered)
232253 in reply to 231847
furlong:
furlong:
And it's not even right. In Italian you'd say "Mi piacciono le tue tette" (plural form of the verb).


And it's not even right. In Italian you'd say "Mi piacciono le tue tette" (plural form of the verb).


Hmm, shouldn't that be:

"In Italia" or "An Italian"

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-12-03 17:43 • by anny (unregistered)
232738 in reply to 230948
Asiago Chow:
then we have private jets


Hmm... are you referring to the automaker CEO private jet "controversy" recently manufactured?

Let's think about this... a CEO doesn't fly alone. He flies with a staff of 10+ people.

These hearings were short notice. Last time I bought an airline ticket on short notice I paid about $650 for coach. When I was able to buy the same ticket on a month's notice it cost about $230. So let's say $6,500 to fly the CEO and his staff to DC.

What does it cost to fly a private jet? I don't know exactly. I don't own a jet. However, I can tell you that it isn't going to be that much. It's less than an hour of flying time at maybe $4000 an hour wet with pilot. So, figure round trip at $8000, vs $6500 for coach... we're having a national debate over $1500????

Oh, but it doesn't end there. It takes at least 3 hours to fly anywhere by commercial airline and much of that is spent in public areas where business discussions are not possible, so we have 30 hours of very high paid senior staff sitting on their thumbs and listening to ipods vs 10 hours of them actually working in a private conference area. That's a 40 hour difference, or maybe $5000 in lost wages. In fact you can bet the delta is higher because high profile people flying on airlines need more security and those security people need tickets too.

So not only is the whole "controversy" silly on its face, but the alternative, using standard airlines, would likely cost GM or equivalent over $3500 MORE than using a private jet.

THINK -- it's not just an IBM slogan


Well - you're off by an order of magnitude (on the low side) in your estimate on how much it costs to fly on a private jet, but don't let that get in the way of your rant.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2008-12-26 09:15 • by Intern (unregistered)
Hey!

That last resumé was mine! :'(

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2009-01-21 23:46 • by sfsad (unregistered)

Re: Thank you, Javascript

2009-03-02 01:13 • by huojia (unregistered)
&nbsp;&nbsp;
货架racking.&nbsp;&nbsp; 仓储货架
南京货架设备要产品包括:重型货架
,阁楼货架,超市Shelf,重量型货架,横梁式货架,驶入式货架... 仓储笼
货架的形式与材料 · 立体仓库 · 货架厂
物流规划设计的步骤与程序(货架的设计... 中国物流行业呈现三足鼎立抢市场 · 亚洲第三方物流的现状和发展 ... 托盘
抽出式货架系列 · 重力式 货架/推入式货架钢托盘
移动式货架 · 阁楼式货架 · 悬臂式货架
系列 长件物料储存货架&nbsp;货架公司

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2009-03-25 02:32 • by hoodaticus (unregistered)
251450 in reply to 230858
Jo Bob:
How in the HELL is someone going to understand what an automated tool is doing, when they can't even learn to do the simple manual equivalent?


Dude, it's just a clicky-little breakpoint-icon thingy and a few clicky-menu thingies in the IDE thingy.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2009-04-18 15:32 • by Duke Ganote (unregistered)
256622 in reply to 230840
"Make the solution as complicated as possible" You mean like those corporate "rock stars" at
PEDANT? :)

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2009-05-19 07:01 • by few (unregistered)


ドルチェ&ガッバーナ
DOLCE & GABBANA
ドルチェ&ガッバーナ バッグ


ドルチェ&ガッバーナ 財布


ドルチェ&ガッバーナ ネ

ックレス

ドルチェ&ガッバーナ 

サングラス

ドルチェ&ガッバーナ リング


ドルチェ&ガッバーナ 香水


ドルチェ&ガッバーナ シュー


ドルチェ&ガッバーナ アウタ


ドルチェ&ガッバーナ インナ


ドルチェ&ガッバーナ シャツ


ドルチェ&ガッバーナ ジーン


ドルチェ&ガッバーナ 時計


ドルチェ&ガッバーナ Tシ

ャツ


グッチ
gucci
グッチ バッグ
グッチ 財布
グッチ ネックレス
グッチ サングラス


グッチ リング
グッチ 香水
グッチ シューズ
グッチ アウター
グッチ シャツ
グッチ ジーンズ
グッチ 時計
グッチ Tシャツ
グッチ アウター
グッチ インナー


ディオール
Christian Dior
ディオール バッグ
ディオール 財布
ディオール ネックレス


ディオール サングラス


ディオール リング
ディオール 香水
ディオール シューズ
ディオール アウター
ディオール シャツ
ディオール ジーンズ
ディオール Tシャツ
ディオール 時計
ディオール インナー

ヴィトン
LOUIS VUITTON
ヴィトン バッグ
ヴィトン 財布
ヴィトン ネックレス


ヴィトン サングラス


ヴィトン リング
ヴィトン シューズ
ヴィトン アウター
ヴィトン シャツ
ヴィトン ジーンズ
ヴィトン Tシャツ
ヴィトン 時計

シャネル
CHANEL
シャネル バッグ
シャネル 財布
シャネル ネックレス


シャネル サングラス


シャネル リング
シャネル 香水
シャネル シューズ
シャネル アウター
シャネル シャツ
シャネル ジーンズ
シャネル Tシャツ
シャネル 時計
シャネル インナー


プラダ
prada
プラダ バッグ
プラダ 財布
プラダ ネックレス
プラダ サングラス


プラダ リング
プラダ 香水
プラダ シューズ
プラダ アウター
プラダ シャツ
プラダ ジーンズ
プラダ Tシャツ
プラダ 時計



フェラガモ
SALVATORE FERRAGAMO
フェラガモ バッグ
フェラガモ 財布
フェラガモ ネックレ


フェラガモ サング

ラス

フェラガモ リング
フェラガモ 香水


フェラガモ シューズ


フェラガモ アウター


フェラガモ シャツ


フェラガモ ジーンズ


フェラガモ Tシャツ


フェラガモ 時計


セリーヌ
CELINE
セリーヌ バッグ
セリーヌ 財布
セリーヌ ネックレス


セリーヌ サングラス



[URL=http://celine-lukus.com/item/category/perfume]セリーヌ 香水

セリーヌ シューズ
セリーヌ アウター
セリーヌ シャツ
セリーヌ ジーンズ
セリーヌ Tシャツ

ボッテガ
BOTTEGA VENETA
ボッテガ バッグ
ボッテガ 財布
ボッテガ ネックレス


ボッテガ サングラス


ボッテガ リング
ボッテガ 香水
ボッテガ シューズ
ボッテガ アウター
ボッテガ シャツ
ボッテガ ジーンズ
ボッテガ Tシャツ

コーチ
COACH
コーチ バッグ
コーチ 財布
コーチ ネックレス
コーチ サングラス


コーチ リング
コーチ 香水
コーチ シューズ
コーチ アウター
コーチ シャツ
コーチ ジーンズ
コーチ Tシャツ
コーチ 時計


ダンヒル
dunhill
ダンヒル バッグ
ダンヒル 財布
ダンヒル カフスボタン



[URL=http://dunhill-lukus.com/item/category/ring]ダンヒル リング

ダンヒル 香水
ダンヒル シューズ
ダンヒル アウター
ダンヒル シャツ
ダンヒル ジーンズ
ダンヒル Tシャツ
ダンヒル 時計

ロエベ
LOEWE
ロエベ バッグ
ロエベ 財布
ロエベ ネックレス
ロエベ サングラス


ロエベ キーホルダー
ロエベ 香水
ロエベ シューズ
ロエベ アウター
ロエベ シャツ
ロエベ ジーンズ
ロエベ Tシャツ

ディーゼル
DIESEL
ディーゼル バッグ
ディーゼル 財布
ディーゼル ネックレス


ディーゼル サングラ


ディーゼル リング
ディーゼル 香水
ディーゼル シューズ
ディーゼル アウター
ディーゼル シャツ
ディーゼル ジーンズ
ディーゼル Tシャツ


ディーゼル 時計
ディーゼル インナー

デリヘル 大阪
仙台 デリヘル
仙台 風俗
仙台 デリヘル
仙台 風俗
仙台 デリヘル
仙台 風俗
家族葬
滋賀 賃貸
葬儀 費用
滋賀県の賃貸
滋賀の賃貸
アダルト SEO
被リンク
茶道具 買取
絵画 買取
レザー
革小物
クレジットカード 現金化
現金化
ショッピング枠 現金化
クレジットカード 現金化
現金化
ショッピング枠 現金化
FX
FX 比較
FX 初心者
ダイエット
ダイエット食品
腕時計
ヘアアイロン
クレイツ
アイビル
アドスト
バッグ
ネイル
アクセンツ
脱毛 大阪
埋没 大阪
わきが 大阪
オーロラ 大阪クリニック
タウンサーチ
探偵 大阪
浮気調査 大阪
素行調査 大阪
別れさせ 大阪
吹田 美容室
エステ 尼崎
メナード 梅田
MM
MAJORITY&MINORITY
エムエム
メナード 梅田


キャッシング
大阪 賃貸
中古車 販売
ルームウェア
大阪 マンション
賃貸マンション 神戸
中古 ゴルフクラブ
クールビズ
フィットネスクラブ
大阪府 司法書士
クレジット 申し込み
ベビードール
矯正歯科 東京
ホワイトニング 東京
大阪 ラブホテル
リサイクルショップ
不動産
カードローン
投資 信託
下着
即日 キャッシング
銀行
神戸市 中央区 税理士
FX
消費者金融
ローン
引越し
生命保険
ジェルネイル
人材派遣
ネット証券
アフィリエイト
格安航空券
ウィークリーマンション
レンタカー
SEO
オフィス家具
合宿免許
ペット用品
高速バス
デリヘル
キャバクラ
派遣
コラーゲン
化粧品
インテリア
ウェディング
結婚相談
投資物件
留学
貸事務所 大阪
経営コンサルティング
工芸品
高級品
自動車保険
ホテヘル
レストランウェディング
バイク買取
運転免許
ベビーカー
外反母趾
圧力鍋
腕時計
フェラガモ
デリヘル
キャバクラ
セレブ
プラセンタ
カルシウム
青汁
ブルーベリー
家具
脱毛クリーム
除毛クリーム
コスト削減 大阪
弁護士 大阪
車買取 大阪
バイク買取 大阪
エステ 大阪
リフォーム 大阪
大阪 歯科
派遣 大阪
アルバイト 大阪
転職 大阪
大阪 住宅
大阪 専門学校
グルメ 大阪
ホテル 大阪
一戸建て 大阪
大阪 宿泊
大阪 マンション
デリヘル 大阪
印刷 大阪
不動産 大阪
賃貸 大阪
ブライダル 大阪
リサイクル
アダルト SEO
賃貸
SEO 大阪
イベント コンパニオン 大阪
転職 大阪
大阪 ラブホ
ペット ショップ 大阪
豆腐
京都 不動産
運転免許 合宿
ヘアアイロン
ダイエット
ダイエット
デリヘル
キャバクラ
シャンパン
老人ホーム
精力剤
大阪 ラブホテル
ブランド品 買取
ワイン
京都 不動産
ペット
リサイクルショップ
歯科求人
結婚式場
バイク便
動物病院
美容整形外科
エルメス
ヘアアイロン
クレイツ
シャンプー
アイビル
ジェルネイル
育毛剤
ドライヤー
アゲハ嬢
ダイエットサプリ
エステ 大阪 フェイシャル
エステ 大阪 求人
エステ 大阪 メンズ
リフォーム 大阪 キッチン
リフォーム 大阪 マンション
リフォーム 大阪 外壁
大阪 歯医者 ランキング
大阪 歯医者 料金
大阪 歯医者 矯正
派遣 大阪 求人
派遣 大阪 短期
派遣 大阪 ランキング
アルバイト 大阪 検索
アルバイト 大阪 短期
アルバイト 大阪 口コミ
転職 大阪 求人
転職 大阪 ランキング
転職 大阪 女性
大阪 住宅 検索
大阪 住宅 ローン
大阪 住宅 中古
専門学校 大阪 美容
専門学校 大阪 看護
専門学校 大阪 調理
大阪 グルメ カフェ
大阪 グルメ お好み焼き
大阪 グルメ たこ焼き
ホテル 大阪 シティホテル
ホテル 大阪 ビジネスホテル
ホテル 大阪 モーテル
大阪 一戸建て 検索
大阪 一戸建て 口コミ
大阪 一戸建て ランキング
大阪 宿泊 格安
大阪 宿泊 高級
大阪 宿泊 口コミ
大阪 マンション 新築
大阪 マンション 中古
大阪 マンション 賃貸
大阪 デリヘル 人妻
大阪 デリヘル OL
大阪 デリヘル 3P
印刷 大阪 チラシ
印刷 大阪 名刺
印刷 大阪 格安
大阪 不動産 検索
大阪 不動産 分譲
大阪 不動産 比較

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2010-08-21 08:25 • by Reginal Plinkman (unregistered)
There is a special place in hell for academics that put poor smucks through this travesty. I recently has a similar experience, had to take two days off from work to go through this ridculously involved interview process, only to find that it was just a formatility so the director could hire someone they already wanted. Two days of sitting around with 7 or 8 degreed people looking at their watches, now I know why I am not giving any more money or support to university systems.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2011-07-12 03:01 • by Prism (unregistered)
353080 in reply to 230925
Lumberjack:
Buddy:
[...] but if the applicant [...] has experience only in XML, [...]


Ok, it's time for me to ask this question because it has been bugging me for the longest time...

What. The. F*ck. does that mean?

Experience in XML? It's tags, people! Tags! As in <tag></tag>. What kind of "experience" are we talking about here? Knowing where to find the angle bracket on a keyboard?


"Its ones and zeros people! What kind of experience are we talking about here? Knowing how to tell the difference between a 1 and a 0??"

First, there is the particular Xml library on your platform -- do you know it, or do you build all your xml with strings?

Then, there is the DB end. Do you know how to interface with XML in T-SQL? Do you know how to query a T-SQL XML object? Know how to break it into RDB tables? (have fun with that)

Then, there is the architectural matters, and XML performance limitations.

Then, there is things like Xpath, and XQuery. Are you familiar and competent enough to compose statements in those syntaxs?

Then there are namespaces, schema definition and validation.

Do we need to get into applications, XSLT, and all the tools out there to help you deal with XML?

I smell a troll.

Re: The Mandatory Three, The Easy Road to Success, and Relevant Inexperience

2011-07-12 03:24 • by Prism (unregistered)
353082 in reply to 231075
Asiago Chow:
Anon:
Asiago Chow:
The real kicker, though, is found in the annals modern medical research. A growing body of evidence shows that humans, social creatures that we are, are less happy, and less healty, when we live alone or in very small social groups. People living alone are more depressed, more likely to suffer health issues, less happy, and more likely to die early, than their cohabitating and more social peers. This brings into stark relief the true cost of so-called "living wages"... far from living, they enable lifestyles which science shows correlate directly with early mortality and reduced happiness in life. The so-called living wage kills, kills in large numbers, by alowing people to live self-destructively solo lifestyles.


What in the holy hell kind of pseudoscientific garbage have you been getting your hands on? A living wage "kills in large numbers"? Do you even read what you wrote before posting?


There are many studies. Look up Berkman and Syme 1979, Lonergan 1991, and do your own googling for many more.


The very thought that people _must_ make less than the minimum amount to survive to protect them from the horrors of being single is sickening. In any other context, for example saying that ugly people are more likely to be single and therefore live self-destructive lives, you would be vilified and ousted from the community.

I voluntarily choose to be childless and single, and I make a decent living. It is no business of yours to make moral judgements about my "self-destructive solo lifestyle" since I harm precisely no one.


I hear the same thing from smokers. "It's no business of yours if I am willing to accept lung cancer." Same thing from people who don't wear seatbelts. "It's no busienss of yours if I'm willing to be launched trough my car windshield and die on the road." Same thing from people who visit prostitutes, "It's no business of yours if I get HPV or HIV." Same thing from pot smokers, "It's no business of yours if I whoa that's a cool shirt it has buttons can I press them?!" Same thing from alcohol drinkers, "It's no business of yours if I want to damage my liver."

Living alone is just another vice. It has known mortality implications. You can deny those risks. A smoker can deny her risk of lung cancer. Denial does not reduce risks.

As a society we have clearly decided that it IS our business. We tax alcohol and cigarettes prohibitively. We criminalzie drugs. We ticket drivers who don't wear seatbelts. We criminalize or severly restrict prostitution. We penalize people who engage in vice.

The US income tax code charges higher rates for singles than for heads of household or married groups. It would make no sense for one arm of government to penalize a particular vice while another encourages the same behavior. That's what living wage regulations would do.

There is only one US political party that supports the idea that you have a right to engage in vice so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. That's the Libertarian Party. They are a bunch of losers. If they are lucky they get 2% of the vote. Unless you are willing to join the Libertarian Party and actually vote Libertarian you are nothing but a hypocrite for thinking that your particular vice is OK and should be supported while allowing your politicians to penalize other vices.


Gotta love how we Americans believe in freedom right up until the moment comes to gang up and tell other people what to do. Just watch our chests puff out all filled with pride as we exercise our "democratic rights".

One big self-delusional fuckin joke.

At least admit you don't actually believe in freedom, it's the least you can do.

« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4Next »

Add Comment