Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Maybe (Score 1) 317

by Aryden (#48553141) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Are Any Certifications Worth Going For?
It seriously depends. In my specialty, having the cert is actually the primary method for getting contracts. Most consumers of the technology I work with go directly to the source and use their "find a consultant" feature, which you can only be listed on if you are certified. With that being said, I stopped paying for certs in other things like CC**, MCSE's, etc, many years ago. Never once, have I ever been asked if I was certified in anything by anyone other than some schmuck recruiter fishing for a new resume to shop around. I would say though, there are certain gigs, like the one I am on now, that "require" a cert for this technology, but they've never asked me for it.

Comment: Re:Bah (Score 1) 459

by Aryden (#48378179) Attached to: Black IT Pros On (Lack Of) Racial Diversity In Tech
And that's the problem. I have been dealing with large organizations for years. I have even been the one to build requirements for a position and submit them to HR for posting. HR will then take those req's, jargon them up so that half the time they don't make sense and then add in their own requirements such as Bachelor's degree in computer science or related field and 10 years experience in X random tech that has nothing to do with the job. I've cursed out HR reps for doing shit like this because they want too much for even entry level positions @ $30k/year. Hell, my 12 year old daughter can do better web design and development than some of the cats coming out of school with "I know Dreamweaver" degrees.

Comment: Re:Bah (Score 1) 459

by Aryden (#48362047) Attached to: Black IT Pros On (Lack Of) Racial Diversity In Tech
This is a misnomer, in today's markets, it is getting increasingly difficult to land jobs without a college degree. I am highly qualified in my field, I have certifications out the ying yang and I still have trouble landing some contracts purely due to not yet having finished my degree and I've been in the field 15 years.

Comment: Re:Sanity? (Score 1) 451

by Aryden (#48269765) Attached to: Ken Ham's Ark Torpedoed With Charges of Religious Discrimination
Yes, the people who wrote it, although not writing their persona views into it, published numerous papers, articles, and even books describing their opinions that government and religion should have nothing to do with one another. And more to your point, "in order to form a well regulated militia" also doesn't mean what the NRA would like it to mean.

Comment: Re:grrr (Score 1) 57

by Aryden (#48259929) Attached to: Taking the Census, With Cellphones
Let's say out of 435 Reps, you have 215 Dems, and 220 Republican. Then there is this shift you speak of. The party in power would then make sure to gerrymander the "new" districts so that it STAYS that way rather than a massive intermixing of voters. So, nothing would really change other than where the rep came from.

Comment: Re:grrr (Score 1) 57

by Aryden (#48256401) Attached to: Taking the Census, With Cellphones
Sorry, keep them where they are in terms of politically assigned districting. i.e transfer 19 reps to Wyoming, then gerrymander them back to being in the same "transplanted" districts. In other words, moving them from CA to WY would have no real effect as the party in power would redraw the lines to suit their desires.

Comment: Re:Sanity? (Score 1) 451

by Aryden (#48256251) Attached to: Ken Ham's Ark Torpedoed With Charges of Religious Discrimination

This is why we have a Supreme Court that rules whether or not a state law violates the constitution of the United States. This has been proven since its inception and continues to be proved regularly. see: same sex marriage. Any state that decided to pass a law stating that X religion is the religion of the state and has rights and privileges within the state that no other religion enjoys, would be struck down by SCOTUS as unconstitutional and you know it.

"The "Establishment Clause," stating that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," is generally read to prohibit the Federal government from establishing a national church ("religion") or excessively involving itself in religion, particularly to the benefit of one religion over another. Following the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and through the doctrine of incorporation, this restriction is held to be applicable to state governments as well."

see also the 14th Amendment

Comment: Re:grrr (Score 1) 57

by Aryden (#48252915) Attached to: Taking the Census, With Cellphones
Not with the way in which Congress has rigged the law in regards to the count of reps from each state. The only real way it would change is if half of CA left for Wyoming. Even then, the math they use would STILL keep them where they are and they would gerrymander the districts to reflect the new population lines.

A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any other invention, with the possible exceptions of handguns and Tequilla. -- Mitch Ratcliffe

Working...