Comment Re:Social or Biological? (Score 1) 588
Unfortunately, teachers are not well-payed, so it's hard to get people into the field, period, let alone men.
Unfortunately, teachers are not well-payed, so it's hard to get people into the field, period, let alone men.
There are plenty good solutions in this thread, but I'd say don't bother recovering, just learn the lesson and move on. I'm pretty sure you'll waste less time that way. Especially since the time wasted will not be yours it looks pretty good to me.
i.e. Hackers whose goal in life is to disrupt access to the system rather than to break in.
Those type of hackers are rare and have less resources. There isn't any point in pure vandalism you see. In any case research has shown that it's not a primary motive.
It's flattering, but incorrect. First of all SpringSource is the company employing the vast majority of Spring committers, but there is a difference between the framework and the company.
Second, Spring is in fact not a standard. It is the de facto standard, which sounds cool to people who give a damn about standards.
I think both of these things are good, you don't want any company to own your framework of choice and you don't want your framework of choice to be polluted by the designed by committee stuff that we've got way too much of already.
If you haven't figured this out and like to be informed: SpringSource pays my salary each month, but I'm speaking on my own terms here.
Interesting problem here: on the one hand there is a valid objection to administering mood stabilizing medicines in this manner, but on the other hand drinking water might be unnaturally devoid of certain essential minerals.
I'm not particularly against unnatural things, but I can't find solid arguments against adding something to the drinking water, provided it is proven that this addition makes it healthier.
The grandparent just offers his analysis. No judgement is expressed if you read carefully. You may disagree, but from your post it seems that it was a good post sparkling an interesting discussion. I'm confused why you think that is "trolling at its worst".
Further more, you write about the statements being "unqualified" and "cannot be substantiated in ANY way", while you offer no arguments to back this up other than "no justice system can operate on such a weak foundation" and "is also simply wrong".
I'm reading: parent is so clearly wrong that I won't bother to give arguments, and because he is wrong he must be trolling.
I'd like to see grandparents claims substantiated or refuted. Modding grandparent down will lead to less readers, and therefore the chances of someone offering more information, or refuting the claims will go down.
Receiving a million dollars tax free will make you feel better than being flat broke and having a stomach ache. -- Dolph Sharp, "I'm O.K., You're Not So Hot"
