Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Nobody knows everything, so some people know some things and other
> people know others. I know things that many people don't know. Many
> people know things that I don't. It's part of what makes everybody
> different...

....and the world not too boring. :)

Nice discussion!

I *have* to join: :)

--Yes, if you are very motivated and want to show that (or not), it's very good
to know the people, who invented those things of your field (IT, trade,
science, etc) [and why and how]. You are showing interest, more than only
telling someone "it's just the way it is".
--If you "just" know the way, how and why they did come up to their theory and
you can use it for your special case/problem, it's also good.
 --But it is quite bad only to learn names, because you want to show that you
know quite a lot about a topic (but are not really interested in).
I really know, why we had to learn that Mr. X did things Y. in the year of XY,
where the people didn't have the comfort, which we are having now. But I really
can't figure out a reason, why we should learn, that Mrs. X. with name X and
surname XX pushed her man Mr. X. with Xx and helped him that way to do XXx? Or
at least I can't figure out any other reason than showing respect to that great
inventors, whose theories and technologies improved our lives...
So far to your problem of only knowing a few peoples names. :)

Regards
               bluetree

Post a reply to this message

478f9c21$1@news.povray.org...
> Interesting. I tend to think that actions rather than thoughts are what 
> gets things done.

Because there are actions that are not backed by thoughts? Apart sex and 
digestion? You really think that people like Gates or Jobs or Ellison just 
started doing random stuff and built their little empires by chance, never 
thinking about it? And Stallman is fundamentally an ideologue. He didn't 
call the GNU Manifesto a manifesto for nothing.

> If you're saying "employers want people who know who Stallman is", then 
> maybe you're right. I don't know. I haven't got a clue what employers 
> actually look for. You probably know more about this than I do.

You still don't get it. Having a job with a certain level of qualification 
implies that you maintain a some awareness of what's going on in your area 
of expertise. Keeping track of major trends and what drives them and knowing 
who is who in your trade is part of being a professional. This is *** 
expected *** in any job that entails expertise.

>If you're saying "you're a ****ing idiot for not knowing who Stallman is", 
>then I'm afraid I must disagree with you. I don't see it as being "morally 
>wrong" to know of a technology and not know who invented it, in which year, 
>and why they did it.

The problem is not about *** being *** a idiot, it's about not *** sounding 
*** like one. I can understand your total lack of interest in certain 
matters, but don't expect the same sort of benevolent complacency from your 
professional peers, including potential employeers. Of course if you want to 
keep saying the darnest things, just do it.

G.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> And I'm aware that Apple is 
> rare but has a niche following in some parts.

  Really? Have you heard of this thing called "iPod"? Are you aware of
its market share? Do you know which company produces it?

  Have you followed the marketshare of this thing called "iPhone" in
the US? Do you know how many people use an Apple computer in the US?

  "Rare" and "niche following" aren't quite close to the truth.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Mathematics fascinates me; the people who made these discoveries are 
> rather irrelevant. Similarly for computers, physics, and many other 
> things...

Except when they're still alive and vocally influencing your 
professional field.

It's like saying you're uninterested in learning about the history of 
politics, so there's no reason to know who the current leader of your 
country is, or what wars your country is currently engaged in.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     It's not feature creep if you put it
     at the end and adjust the release date.

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:
> Of course if you want to keep saying the darnest things, just do it.

It can be helpful to learn how to BS on a topic you know virtually 
nothing about. Then you spend an hour reading a half-dozen wikipedia 
pages, and now you can sound like an expert in them too. ;-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     It's not feature creep if you put it
     at the end and adjust the release date.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Gilles Tran wrote:
>> Of course if you want to keep saying the darnest things, just do it.
> 
> It can be helpful to learn how to BS on a topic you know virtually 
> nothing about. Then you spend an hour reading a half-dozen wikipedia 
> pages, and now you can sound like an expert in them too. ;-)

Except when Wikipedia is wrong... ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> And I'm aware that Apple is 
>> rare but has a niche following in some parts.
> 
>   Really? Have you heard of this thing called "iPod"? Are you aware of
> its market share? Do you know which company produces it?

Last time I checked, an iPod isn't a Mac. What I meant is that the Apple 
Mac is a niche following.

>   Have you followed the marketshare of this thing called "iPhone" in
> the US? Do you know how many people use an Apple computer in the US?

I'm aware Apple is trying really hard to tell the iPhone. I haven't 
heard anybody with anything nice to say about it, so I had presumed that 
it's not doing too well...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> Mathematics fascinates me; the people who made these discoveries are 
>> rather irrelevant. Similarly for computers, physics, and many other 
>> things...
> 
> Except when they're still alive and vocally influencing your 
> professional field.
> 
> It's like saying you're uninterested in learning about the history of 
> politics, so there's no reason to know who the current leader of your 
> country is, or what wars your country is currently engaged in.

Random fact: I know who the 11th president of the USA was, but I have no 
idea what the name of the PM of the UK is...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:

>> Interesting. I tend to think that actions rather than thoughts are what 
>> gets things done.
> 
> Because there are actions that are not backed by thoughts?

No - I just meant that thinking about something doesn't make anything 
happen. Performin actions makes things happen. I tend to focus on the 
actions that companies take, rather than the individuals who thought of 
them, or why.

>> If you're saying "employers want people who know who Stallman is", then 
>> maybe you're right. I don't know. I haven't got a clue what employers 
>> actually look for. You probably know more about this than I do.
> 
> You still don't get it. Having a job with a certain level of qualification 
> implies that you maintain a some awareness of what's going on in your area 
> of expertise.

My area of expertise is computer technology, not economics or business 
climate or whatever the latest buzzword for it is. That's all.

> This is *** expected *** in any job that entails expertise.

As I said, maybe you're right. I don't really know.

> The problem is not about *** being *** a idiot, it's about not *** sounding 
> *** like one.

OK, fair enough.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

479008ec$1@news.povray.org...
> Gilles Tran wrote:
>> Of course if you want to keep saying the darnest things, just do it.
>
> It can be helpful to learn how to BS on a topic you know virtually nothing 
> about. Then you spend an hour reading a half-dozen wikipedia pages, and 
> now you can sound like an expert in them too. ;-)

It sometimes happens that I have someone on the phone asking me stuff that 
I'm mostly ignorant about, while I'm frantically googling about it in real 
time and providing answers as they appear on screen. There's no point trying 
to hide it (people can hear the clicking anyway) but as a rule, answering 
"uh, dude, what are you talking about, never heard about that" is not an 
option.
The ability to assimilate lots of new info in a very short time is part of 
the engineering training here (there's an exam where the student is given a 
full paper and asked to summarize it in a few minutes).

G.

Post a reply to this message