Women suck at computers
Computers are all over the place: the bank, the sciences, the workplace — in other words, places where women are not. Is this a coincidence? You bet your ass that no it isn’t.
Women face countless problems in their pipe-dream of equality. The biggest being that the whole notion is childish and only realistic to an insane person or someone who has never had a job.
Women also suck at computers.
It’s the same way that men suck at being happy when their best friend gets dumped and then has to rely on them for emotional support. That just doesn’t make the kind of sense to us.
Computers are that way for women.
You see, women don’t understand computers because they don’t understand the basics of cause and effect — that the one causes the other. It’s childlike in its simplicity, I know, but it’s absolutely true.
This backwards mentality applies to computers just as easily as it applies to every other aspect of a woman’s life, which she is right about to hopelessly fuck up yet again by doing the exact same thing and expecting it somehow to magically work this time.
I saw this in action just yesterday while waiting in line for an ATM at the bank. For some absurd reason, a woman had been put in charge of her own finances and had promptly lost her ATM card in the machine. She started frantically pressing buttons, expecting that at any moment something profoundly contrary to what had happened was about to happen. Guess what. It didn’t.
What I’m saying here is that men are better than women because every time a man drops a rock in to a ditch, he knows it’s going to fall. Women think that if they do it enough, it will turn into a Snicker’s bar.
Related Articles:
June 2nd, 2006 at 2:57 pm - IP Man-Hash: 31d418f8fe3da
strengh and honor sounds like something that has a place in gladiator (the movie) but this web site??? i think not. you sould find another movie quote like…….. life is like a box of chocolates give a web site to some sad people and you never know what your gonna get!!
uk bloke
P.S i hope the humour is lost on you!!
June 2nd, 2006 at 3:40 pm - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
uk girl, not all of us are limited to quotes from the movies.
-wolfe
June 3rd, 2006 at 3:14 pm - IP Man-Hash: d4caa34a4322d
Its good you got the connection uk bloke, now try to understand why I use it?
-Strength and Honor
June 4th, 2006 at 4:09 am - IP Man-Hash: eadd56da2c7c9
June 4th, 2006 at 4:12 am - IP Man-Hash: eadd56da2c7c9
Oops. Apologies for bad formatting in previous post. Blame Annie’s Lane Shiraz.
-Big Al
June 8th, 2006 at 9:32 am - IP Man-Hash: fdc97f2a7128a
Okay, I have a question to put to you guys.
This site is all about proving that men are better than women - I saw in a few other posts that you are talking about quality rather than inferiority/superiority when saying men are better than women. I would be interested to know how you define this quality and by what standards and measurements (if any)? Who defines quality and why?
June 8th, 2006 at 1:14 pm - IP Man-Hash: c4d026b819ad4
Luka, this site is not about proving men are better than women. Men are better than women. Trying to prove it would be like trying to prove water is made out of water.
-Dick
June 8th, 2006 at 4:03 pm - IP Man-Hash: 9fe794327d1c5
Luka, are you here because you want to fuck Dick?
June 8th, 2006 at 4:47 pm - IP Man-Hash: fdc97f2a7128a
Whatever you say Rap… LOL!
June 8th, 2006 at 4:49 pm - IP Man-Hash: fdc97f2a7128a
So if men are better than women and you don’t need to prove it - then why do you list your articles (by category) under the title ‘the proof’?
June 8th, 2006 at 4:59 pm - IP Man-Hash: c4d026b819ad4
Because they are the proof as you so astutely observed. Simply commenting on the ways in which men are better than women does not make me the one to prove it. Women have been proving it since the dawn of time.
-Dick
June 27th, 2006 at 1:34 am - IP Man-Hash: 6a33623a89f8c
Dick? You are so wrong. I’m very good at computers and I’m pretty sure every other woman in this room is too. As ALL the women in the in this room are using them and a small group of guys are say in the middle flicking paper like children. You really need to get a life. You stupid sexist bastard.
June 27th, 2006 at 4:59 am - IP Man-Hash: 356b2e2244d02
I’m good at flying to the moon and back, Lori. But I don’t expect anyone here to believe me just because I wrote it.
June 27th, 2006 at 6:50 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
Well said, Mike. Of course, you’re a man, so we’d be inclined to believe you anyway. After all, only men have flown to the moon and back.
My dear girl, with “ALL” the women using them, that simply qualifies you as a group of secretaries or data entry clerks.
However, you contend you’re “very good at computers”. Fair enough. Here are a few simple computer questions.
1. You are examining a data network. It is specified as 64kbit. Exactly how fast is this in bits per second?
2. You are examining a voice network. Each channel is specified as DS0 or 64k. How fast is this in bits per second? Is there a reason why the answer might differ from (1)? Discuss. Consider Nyquist’s Theorem; what might this have to do with the answer? Discuss.
3. You are designing a computer controlled braking system for a large truck. Management would like you to include processing GPS input and format it for display on a small digital LCD display. Discuss the merits of architecting the GPS processing a) in the same system routines as the braking; b) on the same cpu core as the braking; c) in the same physical module; d) elsewhere.
4. Why is random exponential binary backoff good? In what circumstances might you expect to see it? Discuss the flaws of this method. Propose a better one.
5. You have a satellite with a series of 64kbit data channels, d1…dn. You are designing two ground stations for this satellite. You need not concern yourself with analog issues; assume you are merely concerned with the digital processing of the channels, including framing issues. Outline the design of an embedded system, with particular focus on the software architecture, that will permit you to both sub-multiplex and channel bond these d channels. Assume your inputs (and outputs) on the terrestrial side are video, voice, UDP and TCP/IP packets. Discuss your multiplexing and channel bonding scheme in considerable detail. Outline the kind of hardware you will need. How would you handle routing, queueing and prioritization? What other issues do you think might be important?
6. Discuss the merits of the kernels for the following OS’s: BeOS, Windows NT, Windows 95, Mac OS 9, Mac OS X, Linux, QNX. Are there any you would regard as unsuitable for deployment on a server? An enterprise desktop? An enterprise embedded system such as a video kiosk? Bonus question: Do you see any advantage to being POSIX-compliant on the desktop? Discuss.
I hope this list of questions is easy for you as you’re “very good at computers”. I suspect however, that you will look at it with some shock as you realize there’s more to the field of computing than loading up Word or Visual Basic or booting up your mac, or even being an MCSE.
I await, though not with bated breath, your answers.
-wolfe
June 27th, 2006 at 9:49 am - IP Man-Hash: 49c9ff889fded
And then there was the deafening sound of silence.
The next voice to be heard was the crying of a woman changing the topic in a desperate attempt to save face.
June 27th, 2006 at 11:46 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
1. 64kbit[/s?] * 1024 = 65536 bits/s = 8192 bytes/s = 8 KB/s.
2. What’s a DS0 channel? 64kwhat?
Nyq.’s theorem?…
Such networking skills are beyond my little self.
3. By virtue of common sense and from what background knowledge I have I say elsewhere. A crucial function such as braking should have it’s own subsystem and own software. Not even another processor or (logical) core on the same system would do, imo.
It should not be left to chance that the cpu (core) or the needed memory for handling the breaking assistance function be swamped by rather irrelevant, by comparison, software functions such as GPS signal monitoring, map parsing, positioning and display, voice recognition routines, etc., and increase page faults, etc.
4. I am not sure what this is. Perhaps I know it by some other name, perhaps I don’t know it at all. I lean towards the latter.
5. Such networking skills are beyond my little self.
6. I can only boast some meagre (well not quite) knowledge of windoz 95, 98 ME, and windoz XP kernels (all properly, legally licensed, unlike some software that I run/ran on them). I do however feel that these Osystem’s kernels are greatly underrated.
For my needs at least I feel that some krafty use of shortcut parameters to set the runtime kernel priority of the desired program is quite adequate for running serverside operations with the desired kernel efficiency. Like so (hlds.exe - half life dedicated server, UDP/IP game server type application):
C:\WINDOWS\system32\cmd.exe /c “START /REALTIME “” “H:\Steam\SteamApps\*************\dedicated server\hlds.exe”" +sv_lan 1 -nomaster -insecure -console -game cstrike +rcon_password ********** +hostname *********.****.Ro +maxplayers 12 +map de_dust2
Also worth noting are the myriad of options available to the knowledgeable windows user intent on optimising and reinforcing his OS. Everything from the msconfig and regedit utilites to Control Panel’s customization of paging file’s fixed size and partition placement, system restore disabling, and so much, much more.
I recommend the FAT32 file system, despite its appaling reviews especially by MSoft when compared to NTFS.
Another huge plus when compared to BEos, Unix based/derived OSs, etc. is the readily available supply of drivers for contemporary windows OSs, even when dealing with the newest and most exotic of components. Also, rather old components/devices such as my Parallel port printer and scanner are still somewhat usable by virtue of generic drivers provided with the OS. Driver smoothness is hardly the case for Linux users with pretentious or plain old/unlucky systems/components. Also, the drivers that be for this OS for such components as Gfx boards are rarely on par with those designed with/for the windows kernel and .NET framework.
There are many more advantages to using a windows for a serverside OS but I shall boil them down to 4: accountability, support, simplicity, standardization.
I do not know what POSIX compliant means.
June 27th, 2006 at 2:46 pm - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
Heh, Sony you were to let the women try to answer. Oh well, you’re probably right they won’t. Your rapid response from someone who’s never claimed to know anything much about computers is quite indicative of what men are capable. Quite good really. You answered the most important question perfectly.
Sonyad: on 1, 10/10.
On 2, 0/10, fair enough. Send me a PM if you want more info. We’ll leave that one open for the ladies, though.
On 3, Outstanding. 20/20. This actually was the key question in my mind.
Q1 told whether someone was alive; Q2 told whether someone had encountered anything involving heterogenous networks, Q3 tells whether or not a person can think at least a little.
On 4, [deleted text; send me a PM via boards if you want more] There are some interesting mathematical subtleties here; this question tests whether a person can think and model mathematically, or is just some sort of script-girl.
Q5: This question would take more time, but is basically an attempt to assess someone’s design skills beyond simply Q3.
Q6: I’m afraid I have to give you a 5/20, but that’s hardly your fault since you never claimed you were a computer expert representing your entire gender. General thoughts:
- The FAT32 system is a dreadful choice for a server; its only merit is compatibility and openness. Completely lacking in journaling, it’s an apallingly unstable file system with which to inflict a machine.
- You’re right about far more drivers for windows, but this is largely irrelevant in the server area and almost entirely irrelevant in the embedded area.
- Anything other than a Windows nt kernel base (note the slight trick there in the question between OS and kernel) (which is NT, 2000, XP, 2003, Vista ) is a dreadful version of Windows for a server. Riddled with 16 bit compatibility code, horrible bugs, a lack of a coherent kernel design and privilege separation, it’s an exploitive disaster waiting to happen. Even the NT versions (certainly pre-vista) get a bit shaky themselves.
- OS X is a bit poorly suited to being a server OS simply because it’s not tuned as such nor is there extensive hardware support for the kind of variety of servers an organization might need. Of course, that doesn’t prevent it from being an excellent server choice for certain applications. Some say it’s a fairly solid and secure web-server in its default shipping mode.
- The Win 9x and nt as well as the pre Mac OSX were attempts to see if the person grasped the difference between things like non-preemptive multi-threading and preemptive multi-threading, as well as proper hardware barriers between processes. The other OS’s were tossed in to see how comfortable people were with flavors of *nix, RTOS’s and boutique OS’s like Be.
Overall, you pass, and total masculine kudos on your answer to question 3.
-wolfe
June 28th, 2006 at 6:46 am - IP Man-Hash: eadd56da2c7c9
But is Lori as good as The Brilliant Paula Bean?
-Big Al
June 28th, 2006 at 8:02 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
It’s even better, Al. If you look closely, that’s the “Brillant” Paula Bean. Looks as though she was as good at English as she was “at computers”.
-wolfe
July 5th, 2006 at 1:27 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Well. I unsuccessfully attempted a little huge overclocking on my machine today. Dare I say it is and will continue to be a learning experience.
The outcome is a little comical and a little annoying - software wise only (thanks entirely to my manly wisdom, intelligence and forethought). No biggy.
Also, being able to learn from past experience (man), next time i’ll make sure and educate myself regarding the target machine mboard’s sata controller as in whether it’s synchronously locked to the fsb or not before attempting such manly feats.