Someone had to spend time emailing, calling, and skyping to interview for job? I think I might cry...
+1. They could rename this post: how Facebook dodged a bullet and avoided hiring a wuss.
This should come as no surprise though. In these modern times of recession and people being made unemployed due to robots it really is a buyer's market and employers can pull as much "shit" as they like and still have a queue of people outside the door looking for jobs.
A queue of desperate people. The good people will never put up with this shit and get jobs through their own personal network that bypasses HR. Ask any manager who needs to fill a slot about the quality of people they get from HR. And I have not gotten a job through traditional means for about 20 years.
I do not know why companies still put up with this...
I don't know in what kind of organization you work, but in most large companies you can't go about hiring people without following the official process. Many times when I had good candidates in my network I had to tell them to send their resume to HR - event trying to get them together with the hiring manager for a coffee would possibly jeopardize their application.
Print copies of this fable for the break room and make sure your boss and the project manager read it.
http://www.slideshare.net/faisalkhadia/the-ant-fable
This is gold!
With the Bible, the things are even worse. Nobody knows who actually wrote the core part, the gospels.
The other half of the NT, Paul's writings, which predate the gospels by a few decades, dont even mention that Jesus was somebody who actually existed outside of Paul's visions and theological concepts.
How the gospels were written and how the new testament was put together is a fascinating subject. There is a scholar named Bart Ehrman who did tons of book about early Christianity, the historical elements of the gospels, etc. Unfortunately this topic is a very delicate matter because many people apparently don't see a difference between a genuine historical interest and religious fanatism and lose their sh*t when the word "bible" comes up, so talking about gospels on this forum is counter-productive, which really is too bad.
It seems that you have some form of belief in supernatural beings of some form or another, such as angels, demons and gods.
Taking from my comment that I believe in God is like saying the ACLU is in favor of pedophilia because they defended NAMBLA. It's simplistic and wrong.
You are not very good at insulting people because you lack empathy, which is another tell-tale sign of a Gen-Y entitled brat.
What makes me nauseous is not the God/no-God part of the discussion; it's the fact that you stated that those scrolls that were written 2000 years ago and that Google was kind enough to digitize for everyone to see are not *worthy* of your time.
Instead of being amazed that you have access (for free) to such valuable historical artefacts (a privilege that was limited to a very small number of people until now) you come out and complain that you'd rather see documents from Leonardo Da Vinci - themselves written at a time where those unworthy Dead See scrolls were already about 1500 years old.
A vast majority of the emails sent worldwide since the last time you charged your iPod are gone forever; yet there is a bunch of documents written 2000 years ago on goatskin and papyrus that have survived (in part) until today. How can you not find that fascinating? These documents could be a wine merchant inventory and it would still be awesome.
Pearls to the pigs. 'Nuff said.
Uh oh, turning burdens of proof around again!?!
I say the Easter Bunny wrote all those books! But he stole most of it from the FSM. All just as plausible as any other fairy tales. Without proof of existence all the gods are just like any other imaginary character.
Unless you live in France, the burden of proof is always on the accuser. So if you want to get your panties in a bunch because some people believe in God, you need some kind of evidence that they are wrong, it's not the other way around.
Your personal belief that there is no God is not a fact (unless someone is writing an article about you) and therefore does not qualify as evidence. This belief is shared by about 10% of the American population (14% world-wide) so that makes you part of a minority. Which means that even if the existence of God was to be decided by a jury, by an election or by an "Eeny, meeny, miny, moe" process, odds are that God would win.
Talk about throwing pearls to the pigs... You must be one of those entitled Gen-Y.
Here is an idea that would be "worth your time" [1]: why don't you build an internet company that is worth billions of dollars then use some of the profits to fund a project where Leonardo Da Vinci's manuscripts are being found (or made available), digitized and published online for all to see?
I suspect that the day you accomplish that, your opinion about the Dead Sea scrolls will have a bigger impact. Meanwhile feel free to tweet about it, I'm sure your 8 followers will be delighted, you may even get a Like if posted on Facebook.
[1] with those quotes around "worth your time" I hope to convey how annoyed I get by reading the part of your comment where you talk about things that are worth spending your time with.
30% are copies of texts not canonized in the Hebrew Bible (i.e. fanfiction) from the Second Temple Period
For using the expression "fanfiction" to describe Dead Sea scrolls, you sir deserve a mod point I don't have.
Disclaimer: I opted out of the moderation system because I do not trust collective wisdom.
Hard to believe, but many, many people still believe the stories told in these documents are the literal word of God
I don't know a lot of religions where the sacred book is advertised as containing the literal word of God. Most are (allegedly) God-inspired. The closer you get from the "source" is with the Q'ran because it was never translated - however it was written from memory by followers of Muhammad so if this was a CSI episode one would have to admit that the chain of evidence is somehow broken.
In any event by suggesting that those books are *not* inspired by God (which according to current scientific knowledge may or may not exist) you are taking a position that is not supported by established facts, therefore promoting yourself a "fable". If you want to drape yourself in the cloth of Science make sure you follow its basic tenets. Hypothesis are only the 2nd step in the scientific method.
Those are products which have different licenses for the "community" edition and the "real" ones. I've used both and even the commercial editions are quite unpleasant to deal with, plus they steer you to a proprietary stack, just like more mature offerings (Cognos, BO, Oracle, Microsoft, etc.)
Commercial BI products are usually either brutal or too clever for their own good. Those two, Jasper and Pentaho, are more of the same, plus they feel like you need to have the guy who designed them to sit besides you and explain what to do. And community/forum-driven support is not that great.
The most interesting open reporting solution is definitely BIRT, it runs circle around Jasper:
http://www.eclipse.org/birt/phoenix/
Also, accounting perspective is miopic. That's why accounting is a department, not a C-level position.
I don't know in what kind of organization you work, but in my experience when there are C-level positions the first one to be created after CEO is CFO. And in most organizations the CFO has more power than the CIO/CTO (if there is even one - in many organizations IT is directly reporting to the CFO). I could provide you with links about the growing power of CFOs in IT but I'm sure your Google works just fine.
Obviously with such a disconnect between our individual experiences we will never see eye-to-eye.
Also so far my experience with cloud providers (mostly Azure+Office365, some AWS) has been terrific and every setup I've done includes a backup or sync on a different provider (or locally) so the actual risk of getting locked out is inexistant, and for most organizations I've worked with the risk of having a major cloud disruption versus the risk of a major production incident with the local infrastructure makes the cloud very attractive. Which is why I suspect that you don't have a different experience with cloud providers (if any experience at all) but merely a preconceived idea.
In blue water, no they can't. Russia used to, China will someday, but right now it's pretty safe out there except for friendly fire.
When you get closer to the coast it's a different story, but then, unless there is a war it should not happen.
Something about Russian culture makes long periods of isolation more tolerable for them somehow
The US has ballisitic missile submarines, with crew members that get isolated for months.
Sometimes they get to live on nice islands and sleep with cute native bar owners. And since there is not a single non-NATO army that has at the moment the naval capability to sink them they have it good.
This used to be good advice, because Macs were such a small share of the market that the malware authors didn't bother with them. This isn't quite so true any more.
It is true that Macs are not (relatively) free from threats anymore, but damn, they sure have a lot fewer to deal with. No?
Not anymore. Remember that story posted not so long ago?
http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2012/11/02/microsofts-security-team-is-killing-it-not-one-product-on-kasperskys-top-10-vulnerabilities-list/
Apple is on that list twice (QuickTime and iTunes). Adobe is there a lot. No Microsoft products.
Feel free to bring the conspiracy/fraudulent research theories but really it's time people move on with old stuff.
Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (5) All right, who's the wiseguy who stuck this trigraph stuff in here?
