Finally recovered from the GSEC test - it was three hours of torture. I am not knocking the certification or material... it is all worthwhile and keeping up with bits that are out of your normal routine is commendable. But the test gets into a bit of microscopic detail for a broad certification. Knowing command line switches for an OS I rarely use just seems arcane - although it may give me the ability to appreciate the predicament of some of my peers. Since the test is 'open book' it also helps to know how to search for these answers quickly. The test is not quite as bad as some of the old Novell CNE tests - the ones where you had to know what would be on the menu of the next screen... I wouldn't have been surprised if they would simply have asked, "OK, what is the 4th word on page 247 of the Service and Support Guide?"...
My wife's new Apple iBook continues to amaze me. She took it into work earlier today and had the 6 year olds run around the YMCA and take pictures with her digital camera. She syncs the camera to iPhoto, downloads the 'YMCA' tune from somewhere and the kids have created a terrific slide show! Talk about user friendly! Now if I could figure out why this guy's PowerBook (OSX 10.3) keeps losing his WEP key at work... (at least we'll be moving to EAP shortly)
Despite all of the work and hard studying that has consumed me, I make it a habit not to miss the Wall Street Journal which offered a sane counterpoint to USA Today's headline that the debate on global warming is over. The WSJ article discusses Exxon's CEO's approach to global warming:
Openly and unapologetically, the world's No. 1 oil company disputes the notion that fossil fuels are the main cause of global warming.
Lee Raymond, Exxon's CEO said: 'Why don't you just go spend $50 million on solar cells? Charge it off to the public-affairs budget and just say it's like another dry hole?' The answer is: That's not the way we do things."
You have to admire a company that holds to the truth as it sees it. They employ several very highly respected scientists in the field of global warming who don't dispute the global warming trend - but do want to see how much man made causes contribute to global warming.
If the USA Today article is accurate it should be considered a religious victory not a scientific one - that big companies are rolling over and placating critics by spending some petty cash on 'environmental causes' is simply PR. It is amazing that one can spend so much on USA Today and get so very little.
Comments