Partners Wanted

Partners Wanted

[Bahram Mirkalami]

Send your resume to:
S. B. Mirkalami
45 Rathfon Crs. Richmond Hill, Ont. L4C 5B6
Canada

The partnership is to create the virtual shopping mall of the next
millenium
on the internet.

Re: Partners Wanted

[Kim N�rby Andersen]

Umm, you are  not excatly being precise.....

What kind of guys are you looking for..



>The partnership is to create the virtual shopping mall of the next
>millenium
>on the internet.
>

Re: Partners Wanted

[P.S. Norby]

Kim N�rby Andersen wrote:
> 
> Umm, you are  not excatly being precise.....
> 
> What kind of guys are you looking for..
               ^^^^

Sexist!

> 
> >The partnership is to create the virtual shopping mall of the next
> >millenium
> >on the internet.
> >

\\\    \\\    \\\    \\\    \\\    \\\    \\\    \\\    \\\ 
( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)
///    ///    ///    ///    ///    ///    ///    ///    /// 
(Speaking only for myself)

Re: Partners Wanted

[Roedy Green]

On Fri, 09 Jul 1999 08:19:13 -0500, "P.S. Norby"
<psnorby@cacd.rockwell.com> wrote:

>> What kind of guys are you looking for..
>               ^^^^
>Sexist!

Back in my university days, the distribution of men and women in the
computer field was much more equal than today.  What happened?  Why
did computers become an almost exclusively male preserve?


Stop the Makah Whale Sacrifice <http://mindprod.com/whale.html>
--
Roedy Green,  Canadian Mind Products 
-30-

Re: Partners Wanted

[Sunil Rao]

Roedy Green wrote:
> Back in my university days, the distribution of men and women in the
> computer field was much more equal than today.  What happened?  Why
> did computers become an almost exclusively male preserve?

Ever since young socially inept boys discovered the magic of
microcomputers and videogame consoles and chose to spend their days
playing with their newfangled toys. The number of geeky males far
exceeds the corresponding number in females, and it is probably best to
take this discussion to a sociology newsgroup.


-- 
{ Sunil Rao }
"In my opinion, I think that an author when he is writing should
 definitely not get into the habit of making use of too many 
 unnecessary words that he does not really need in order to put his
 message across."  - George L Trigg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42748 (1979).

Re: Partners Wanted

[Jim]

On Mon, 12 Jul 1999 17:01:10 +0100, Sunil Rao <sunil.rao@ic.ac.uk>
wrote:

>Roedy Green wrote:
>> Back in my university days, the distribution of men and women in the
>> computer field was much more equal than today.  What happened?  Why
>> did computers become an almost exclusively male preserve?
>
>Ever since young socially inept boys discovered the magic of
>microcomputers and videogame consoles and chose to spend their days
>playing with their newfangled toys. The number of geeky males far
>exceeds the corresponding number in females, and it is probably best to
>take this discussion to a sociology newsgroup.

But UK stats show young girls are more likely to be online than young
men (under 18's.)  so that falls down, course it's too late for those
of older, we're all stuck as geeky males.

Jim.

Re: Partners Wanted

[Edward Hill]

Jim wrote:
: But UK stats show young girls are more likely to be online than young
: men (under 18's.)  so that falls down, course it's too late for those
: of older, we're all stuck as geeky males.

Statistics can show anything you want.
Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics.
You should never trust someone else's interpretation of a statistic.

Ed

Re: Partners Wanted

[Sunil Rao]

Jim wrote:
> But UK stats show young girls are more likely to be online than young
> men (under 18's.)

Looking up pictures of their favourite boy band. Doesn't necessarily
mean they'll go into the field, they know they need to know how to use a
comp even to get a secretarial job. Pure pragmatism, no interest. :)


-- 
{ Sunil Rao }
"In my opinion, I think that an author when he is writing should
 definitely not get into the habit of making use of too many 
 unnecessary words that he does not really need in order to put his
 message across."  - George L Trigg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42748 (1979).

Re: Partners Wanted

[Sunil Rao]

Sunil Rao wrote:
> 
> Jim wrote:
> > But UK stats show young girls are more likely to be online than young
> > men (under 18's.)
> 
> Looking up pictures of their favourite boy band. Doesn't necessarily
> mean they'll go into the field, they know they need to know how to use a
> comp even to get a secretarial job. Pure pragmatism, no interest. :)

Before I get roundly flamed, of course I'm stereotyping here. Just
making the point that simply because more of them use computers doesn't
mean that more of them are actually curious about how they work. This is
seriously offtopic for comp.lang.c so I'll shut up.

-- 
{ Sunil Rao }
"In my opinion, I think that an author when he is writing should
 definitely not get into the habit of making use of too many 
 unnecessary words that he does not really need in order to put his
 message across."  - George L Trigg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42748 (1979).

Re: Partners Wanted

[Edward Hill]

Sunil Rao wrote:
: 
: Sunil Rao wrote:
: >
: > Jim wrote:
: > > But UK stats show young girls are more likely to be online than
young
: > > men (under 18's.)
: >
: > Looking up pictures of their favourite boy band. Doesn't necessarily
: > mean they'll go into the field, they know they need to know how to
use a
: > comp even to get a secretarial job. Pure pragmatism, no interest. :)
: 
: Before I get roundly flamed, of course I'm stereotyping here. Just
: making the point that simply because more of them use computers
doesn't
: mean that more of them are actually curious about how they work. This
is
: seriously offtopic for comp.lang.c so I'll shut up.

Of course there will be a surprising lack of delay while your first
message races round all the news servers, whereas the second 
will be myteriosly delayed, and the flames will come.

Ed

Re: Partners Wanted

[Scott McMahan]

Roedy Green (a1b84881@mail.bctel.ca) wrote:

> Back in my university days, the distribution of men and women in the
> computer field was much more equal than today.  What happened?  Why
> did computers become an almost exclusively male preserve?

COBOL was replaced by C. A perfectly understandable language based on
English that allowed you to tell the computer what to do was replaced
by a language that looked like modem line noise. There seems to be a dip
in the proportions of male/female about this time -- in the olden days,
the male/female ratio was about the same in business shops. (Not that
I was there, but I know people who were.) Not that I'm generalizing
or anything, but most women seemed to be COBOL coders, and went into
management.  There's a generation gap of sorts between the old-guard
COBOL coders who went into management, and the new guard who go directly
into management :) I don't have any numbers to back up my theory, though,
so it's just a wild guess.

Scott

Re: Partners Wanted

[P.S. Norby]

Scott McMahan wrote:
> 
> Roedy Green (a1b84881@mail.bctel.ca) wrote:
> 
> > Back in my university days, the distribution of men and women in the
> > computer field was much more equal than today.  What happened?  Why
> > did computers become an almost exclusively male preserve?
> 
> COBOL was replaced by C. A perfectly understandable language based on
> English that allowed you to tell the computer what to do was replaced
> by a language that looked like modem line noise. There seems to be a dip
> in the proportions of male/female about this time -- in the olden days,
> the male/female ratio was about the same in business shops. (Not that
> I was there, but I know people who were.) Not that I'm generalizing
> or anything, but most women seemed to be COBOL coders, and went into
> management.  There's a generation gap of sorts between the old-guard
> COBOL coders who went into management, and the new guard who go directly
> into management :) I don't have any numbers to back up my theory, though,
> so it's just a wild guess.
> 
> Scott

There's an interesting report, "Why Are There So Few Female Computer
Scientists?" at http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/ellens/Gender/why.html
 
\\\    \\\    \\\    \\\    \\\    \\\    \\\    \\\    \\\ 
( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)   ( :)
///    ///    ///    ///    ///    ///    ///    ///    /// 
(Speaking only for myself)

Re: Partners Wanted

[Andrew Koenig]

In article <378B3D39.28B3@cacd.rockwell.com>,
P.S. Norby <psnorby@cacd.rockwell.com> wrote:
> Scott McMahan wrote:

> > COBOL was replaced by C. A perfectly understandable language based on
> > English that allowed you to tell the computer what to do was replaced
> > by a language that looked like modem line noise.

Cobol.  Perfectly understandable.  Yeah, right.

OK, here's a pop quiz.  If X is 7 and Y is 3 and you execute

	MULTIPLY X BY Y.

what will be the values of X and Y afterwards?
-- 
Andrew Koenig, ark@research.att.com, http://www.research.att.com/info/ark

Re: Partners Wanted

[Steve Horne]

Andrew Koenig wrote:
> 
> Cobol.  Perfectly understandable.  Yeah, right.
> 

The first program I ever had to maintain was chock full of "ALTER GOTO"
statements.

Has anyone ever been exposed to that language atrocity?  Simple and
understandable?  Absolutely not.

-Steve

Re: Partners Wanted

[Michael F. Yoder]

Steve Horne wrote:

> The first program I ever had to maintain was chock full of "ALTER GOTO"
> statements.
> 
> Has anyone ever been exposed to that language atrocity?  Simple and
> understandable?  Absolutely not.
> 
> -Steve

A friend of mine was a COBOL programmer who worked for a time at
Polaroid, and (of course) read their programming standard for COBOL.  He
told me that the section on the ALTER verb read, in its entirety:

"Use of the ALTER verb is punishable by death."

-- 
----
Michael Yoder

Re: Partners Wanted

[Warner Bruns]

In article <FEtE5A.Cu0@research.att.com>, ark@research.att.com (Andrew
Koenig) writes:
> In article <378B3D39.28B3@cacd.rockwell.com>,
> P.S. Norby <psnorby@cacd.rockwell.com> wrote:
> > Scott McMahan wrote:
> 
> > > COBOL was replaced by C. A perfectly understandable language based on
> > > English that allowed you to tell the computer what to do was replaced
> > > by a language that looked like modem line noise.
> 
> Cobol.  Perfectly understandable.  Yeah, right.
> 
> OK, here's a pop quiz.  If X is 7 and Y is 3 and you execute
> 
> 	MULTIPLY X BY Y.
> 
> what will be the values of X and Y afterwards?
> -- 
> Andrew Koenig, ark@research.att.com, http://www.research.att.com/info/ark

 Let me guess:

   X now has the value of 21

 Is this right?

Re: Partners Wanted

[Andrew Koenig]

In article <7mfpke$ebq$1@mamenchi.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE>,
Warner Bruns <bruns@tetibm2.ee.TU-Berlin.DE> wrote:

> > OK, here's a pop quiz.  If X is 7 and Y is 3 and you execute

> > 	MULTIPLY X BY Y.

>  Let me guess:

>    X now has the value of 21

>  Is this right?

No, it's wrong.  Please try again.

My point in bringing up this example, by the way, is that the
meaning of ``obvious'' depends in large part on what is familiar.
-- 
Andrew Koenig, ark@research.att.com, http://www.research.att.com/info/ark

Re: Partners Wanted

[Roedy Green]

On Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:24:39 GMT, ark@research.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
wrote:

>> > OK, here's a pop quiz.  If X is 7 and Y is 3 and you execute
>
>> > 	MULTIPLY X BY Y.

I asked a COBOL programmer.  He said that syntax is never used in
practice.


Stop the Makah Whale Sacrifice <http://mindprod.com/whale.html>
--
Roedy Green,  Canadian Mind Products 
-30-

Re: Partners Wanted

[Andrew Koenig]

In article <37928f6b.332959901@news.bctel.ca>,
Roedy Green <roedy@mindprod.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:24:39 GMT, ark@research.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
> wrote:

> >> > 	MULTIPLY X BY Y.

> I asked a COBOL programmer.  He said that syntax is never used in
> practice.

In other words, he doesn't know what it does, either :-)
-- 
Andrew Koenig, ark@research.att.com, http://www.research.att.com/info/ark

Re: Partners Wanted

[LR]

Hi,
According to the draft standard (no, no, the COBOL one) section
14.10.25.3 (see http://people.ne.mediaone.net/pennyjs/home.htm)  the
value of Y will be 21 and the value of X is implied to be 7.  

But it's been about 15 years since I used COBOL.  So am I right?  Was
using the standard to find an answer cheating?

I guess that I'm assuming that both X and Y are something like PIC 99. 
And not PIC 9. Maybe your question didn't have enough context?  I guess
that it's possible that Y might be 1.

Can I ask about my report writer problems now? ;)

LR.

Andrew Koenig wrote:
> 
> In article <37928f6b.332959901@news.bctel.ca>,
> Roedy Green <roedy@mindprod.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:24:39 GMT, ark@research.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
> > wrote:
> 
> > >> >  MULTIPLY X BY Y.
> 
> > I asked a COBOL programmer.  He said that syntax is never used in
> > practice.
> 
> In other words, he doesn't know what it does, either :-)
> --
> Andrew Koenig, ark@research.att.com, http://www.research.att.com/info/ark

Re: Partners Wanted

[Richard Heathfield]

Andrew Koenig <ark@research.att.com> wrote in article
<FEtKD3.G52@research.att.com>...
> In article <7mfpke$ebq$1@mamenchi.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE>,
> Warner Bruns <bruns@tetibm2.ee.TU-Berlin.DE> wrote:
> 
> > > OK, here's a pop quiz.  If X is 7 and Y is 3 and you execute
> 
> > > 	MULTIPLY X BY Y.
> 
> >  Let me guess:
> 
> >    X now has the value of 21
> 
> >  Is this right?
> 
> No, it's wrong.  Please try again.
> 
> My point in bringing up this example, by the way, is that the
> meaning of ``obvious'' depends in large part on what is familiar.

Harvey's Law: For every 255 on-topic threads, there should be 1 off-topic
thread. In that spirit, I'll answer:

X is now 7 and Y is now 3.

It's analogous to the C code:

int x = 7, y = 3;

x * y;

Well, okay, I'm guessing. So?  ;-)


-- 
Richard Heathfield

The bug stops here.

Re: Partners Wanted

[Andrew Koenig]

In article <01becd57$fb266980$0e01a8c0@eton.powernet.co.uk>,
Richard Heathfield <complangc@eton.powernet.co.uk> wrote:
> Andrew Koenig <ark@research.att.com> wrote in article

> Harvey's Law: For every 255 on-topic threads, there should be 1 off-topic
> thread. In that spirit, I'll answer:

> X is now 7 and Y is now 3.

> It's analogous to the C code:

> int x = 7, y = 3;

> x * y;

> Well, okay, I'm guessing. So?  ;-)

Indeed, you're guessing -- and you're guessing wrong.

That's 0 for 2.  Still think Cobol is obvious?
-- 
Andrew Koenig, ark@research.att.com, http://www.research.att.com/info/ark

Re: Partners Wanted

[Dale King]

Andrew Koenig wrote in message ...
>Cobol.  Perfectly understandable.  Yeah, right.
>
>OK, here's a pop quiz.  If X is 7 and Y is 3 and you execute
>
> MULTIPLY X BY Y.
>
>what will be the values of X and Y afterwards?

Judging by this sample code: http://www.baylor.edu/~Galen_Swint/cbl_ex.html

I'd say X = 7 and Y = 21.

I for one would never say Cobol is obvious having programmed in it many
moons ago.

--
 --- Dale King

Re: Partners Wanted

[Richard Heathfield]

Andrew Koenig <ark@research.att.com> wrote in article
<FEtnyE.HMG@research.att.com>...
> In article <01becd57$fb266980$0e01a8c0@eton.powernet.co.uk>,
> Richard Heathfield <complangc@eton.powernet.co.uk> wrote:
> > Andrew Koenig <ark@research.att.com> wrote in article
> 
> > Harvey's Law: For every 255 on-topic threads, there should be 1
off-topic
> > thread. In that spirit, I'll answer:
> 
> > X is now 7 and Y is now 3.
> 
> > It's analogous to the C code:
> 
> > int x = 7, y = 3;
> 
> > x * y;
> 
> > Well, okay, I'm guessing. So?  ;-)
> 
> Indeed, you're guessing -- and you're guessing wrong.
> 
> That's 0 for 2.  Still think Cobol is obvious?

Never said it was (or at least I don't think I did). But I never learned
COBOL. I spent three days trying to, but a COBOLler looked over my
shoulder, said "That's recursion! You can't do that in COBOL!". I asked why
not, since it clearly worked, and he went running into the DP manager's
office. I was then promptly - and firmly - given something else to do
instead.  ;-)


-- 
Richard Heathfield

The bug stops here.

Re: Partners Wanted

[Dale King]

Richard Heathfield wrote in message
<01becd57$fb266980$0e01a8c0@eton.powernet.co.uk>...
>Harvey's Law: For every 255 on-topic threads, there should be 1 off-topic
>thread. In that spirit, I'll answer:

You sure you don't have those numbers backwards? ;-)

--
 --- Dale King

Re: Partners Wanted

[Lawrence Kirby]

In article <t0Gi3.1038$J71.54999@monger.newsread.com>
           scott@aravis.softbase.com "Scott McMahan" writes:

>Roedy Green (a1b84881@mail.bctel.ca) wrote:
>
>> Back in my university days, the distribution of men and women in the
>> computer field was much more equal than today.  What happened?  Why
>> did computers become an almost exclusively male preserve?
>
>COBOL was replaced by C.

When did that happen? Cobol still exists but much Cobol development has
been replaced to some extent by 4Gls, SQL and database systems and off the
shelf applications. Perhaps the probleem is that the type of application
being developed has changed.

>A perfectly understandable language based on
>English that allowed you to tell the computer what to do was replaced
>by a language that looked like modem line noise.

It doesn't have to look like that. There are other language too, this
is being cross-posted to Ada and Delphi newsgroups.

-- 
-----------------------------------------
Lawrence Kirby | fred@genesis.demon.co.uk
Wilts, England | 70734.126@compuserve.com
-----------------------------------------

Re: Partners Wanted

[P.S. Norby]

Richard Heathfield wrote:
> 
> P.S. Norby <psnorby@cacd.rockwell.com> wrote in article
> <3785F6D1.3BE9@cacd.rockwell.com>...
> > Kim N�rby Andersen wrote:
> > >
> > > Umm, you are  not excatly being precise.....
> > >
> > > What kind of guys are you looking for..
> >                ^^^^
> >
> > Sexist!
> >
> 
> a) the term 'guys' is, in many parts of the world, used in the same sense
> as 'mankind' to refer to both men and women.
> b) sexist? So what? Has Usenet suddenly gone politically correct and I
> didn't notice?
> c) What has this got to do with ANSI standard C anyway?
> 
> --
> Richard Heathfield
> 
> The bug stops here.

If a woman is swept off a ship into the water, the cry is `Man
overboard!' 
If she is killed by a hit-and-run driver, the charge is `manslaughter.' 
If she is injured on the job, the coverage is `workmen's compensation.' 
But if she arrives at a threshold marked `Men Only,' she knows the
admonition is not intended to bar animals or plants or inanimate
objects. It is meant for her
   --- Alma Graham

Re: Partners Wanted

[firewind]

"P.S. Norby" wrote:
> If a woman is swept off a ship into the water, the cry is `Man
> overboard!'
> If she is killed by a hit-and-run driver, the charge is `manslaughter.'
> If she is injured on the job, the coverage is `workmen's compensation.'
> But if she arrives at a threshold marked `Men Only,' she knows the
> admonition is not intended to bar animals or plants or inanimate
> objects. It is meant for her
>    --- Alma Graham

And when she posts something like this, we call her a 'troll.'

Re: Partners Wanted

[John Duncan]

Please take this to alt.flame. Now.
-John

firewind <firewind@aurdev.com> wrote in message
news:37861960.BE8E4AD0@aurdev.com...
> "P.S. Norby" wrote:
> > If a woman is swept off a ship into the water, the cry is `Man
> > overboard!'
> > If she is killed by a hit-and-run driver, the charge is `manslaughter.'
> > If she is injured on the job, the coverage is `workmen's compensation.'
> > But if she arrives at a threshold marked `Men Only,' she knows the
> > admonition is not intended to bar animals or plants or inanimate
> > objects. It is meant for her
> >    --- Alma Graham
>
> And when she posts something like this, we call her a 'troll.'

Re: Partners Wanted

[Kenny A. Chaffin]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1334 bytes --]

In article <3786379F.18FF@cacd.rockwell.com>, psnorby@cacd.rockwell.com 
says...
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
> > 
> > P.S. Norby <psnorby@cacd.rockwell.com> wrote in article
> > <3785F6D1.3BE9@cacd.rockwell.com>...
> > > Kim N�rby Andersen wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Umm, you are  not excatly being precise.....
> > > >
> > > > What kind of guys are you looking for..
> > >                ^^^^
> > >
> > > Sexist!
> > >
> > 
> > a) the term 'guys' is, in many parts of the world, used in the same sense
> > as 'mankind' to refer to both men and women.
> > b) sexist? So what? Has Usenet suddenly gone politically correct and I
> > didn't notice?
> > c) What has this got to do with ANSI standard C anyway?
> > 
> > --
> > Richard Heathfield
> > 
> > The bug stops here.
> 
> If a woman is swept off a ship into the water, the cry is `Man
> overboard!' 
> If she is killed by a hit-and-run driver, the charge is `manslaughter.' 
> If she is injured on the job, the coverage is `workmen's compensation.' 
> But if she arrives at a threshold marked `Men Only,' she knows the
> admonition is not intended to bar animals or plants or inanimate
> objects. It is meant for her
>    --- Alma Graham
> 

and your point is ??

-- 
KAC Website Design
Custom Programming, Web Design, and Graphics
kenny@kacweb.com    -     http://www.kacweb.com

Re: Partners Wanted

[Mark]

what do you bring with you?
got hardware?
let's see your resume first.

- M


On Thu, 08 Jul 1999 22:42:42 GMT, Bahram Mirkalami <brianal@home.com>
wrote:

>Send your resume to:
>S. B. Mirkalami
>45 Rathfon Crs. Richmond Hill, Ont. L4C 5B6
>Canada
>
>The partnership is to create the virtual shopping mall of the next
>millenium
>on the internet.
>

Re: Partners Wanted

[Bahram Mirkalami]

Mark (and all other willing parties) should know that we do bring to the
table hardware, software, some advertizing money and more. Please don't
hesitate to send your resume. I have a lot of respect for ada
programmers.

Mark wrote:

> what do you bring with you?
> got hardware?
> let's see your resume first.
>
> - M
>
> On Thu, 08 Jul 1999 22:42:42 GMT, Bahram Mirkalami <brianal@home.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Send your resume to:
> >S. B. Mirkalami
> >45 Rathfon Crs. Richmond Hill, Ont. L4C 5B6
> >Canada
> >
> >The partnership is to create the virtual shopping mall of the next
> >millenium
> >on the internet.
> >