RE: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
Do you remember Mainframe systems??? Do you remember LU and PU and logic controllers?? Do they all work the same as IP networks or VOIP and IP telephony networks? Do you know all the traffic in your data network??? You seem to be bitter about something. Do you want someone with 20 years experience Appling a network change without testing out first in a lab environment??? Last but certainly not least, how many mainframe guys know IP networking. You provide me a list Answer is very few. Many PBX or Telecomm Engineer knows VOIP or IP Telephony?? Answer is very few. Giving me dates when things start is like tell me that we still need to go print a circuit board for two days and use tubes, diodes, and transistors, instead a sing microprocessor. Finally, There are many people with 20 years of experience who feel that they dont need to learn new technologies and therefore still trying fight progress. We do not know every thing out there but at least we can try to be knowledge as possible. You need to be more appreciative of people who want to be the best. Be weather it be CCIE or Cissp. They have to study just like any other professional. If my doctor doesnt put in at least 100 hours of training and giving me a diagnostic, I will sue his pants off. Stop being an idiot Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44657&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
Shucks, folks, 'most everyone knows that the real world has its moments. Users. They generally provide considerable exposure to "that which is perceived as real". 'Course, it's always nice to have a test-bed; but I think "lab rat" is a different definition. So, perhaps to lighten things up, here's a little ditty from the past. = Psychologists have recently decided to refrain from using white rats as experimental animals. So, instead, they decided to use lawyers. It seems the psycs wanted to avoid an emotional attachment... ;-) But, on real-world experience (get the thread!?), the psychological community found that there was a hidden advantage in the change. There are some things that white rats just won't do. Happy M-o-n-d-a-y Best, G. VP OCG Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44662&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
Why do you folks bother arguing these useless points? If you lost a job to someone who had less experience than you or vice versa, don't cry foul, go learn how to interview or reevaluate exactly what it is you bring to an employer and make sure you are getting that across. At 03:56 PM 5/21/2002 -0400, Thompson Alton wrote: >Do you remember Mainframe systems??? Do you remember LU and PU and logic >controllers?? Do they all work the same as IP networks or VOIP and IP >telephony networks? >Do you know all the traffic in your data network??? You seem to be bitter >about something. Do you want someone with 20 years experience Appling a >network change without testing out first in a lab environment??? Last but >certainly not least, how many mainframe guys know IP networking. You provide >me a listAnswer is very few. Many PBX or Telecomm Engineer knows VOIP or IP >Telephony?? Answer is very few. Giving me dates when things start is like >tell me that we still need to go print a circuit board for two days and use >tubes, diodes, and transistors, instead a sing microprocessor. > >Finally, There are many people with 20 years of experience who feel that >they dont need to learn new technologies and therefore still trying fight >progress. We do not know every thing out there but at least we can try to be >knowledge as possible. > > You need to be more appreciative of people who want to be the best. Be >weather it be CCIE or Cissp. They have to study just like any other >professional. If my doctor doesnt put in at least 100 hours of training and >giving me a diagnostic, I will sue his pants off. > >Stop being an idiot Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44664&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
Peter, your a genius very good point. Jason CCIE 8748 Peter van Oene wrote: > Why do you folks bother arguing these useless points? If you lost a job to > someone who had less experience than you or vice versa, don't cry foul, go > learn how to interview or reevaluate exactly what it is you bring to an > employer and make sure you are getting that across. > > At 03:56 PM 5/21/2002 -0400, Thompson Alton wrote: > >Do you remember Mainframe systems??? Do you remember LU and PU and logic > >controllers?? Do they all work the same as IP networks or VOIP and IP > >telephony networks? > >Do you know all the traffic in your data network??? You seem to be bitter > >about something. Do you want someone with 20 years experience Appling a > >network change without testing out first in a lab environment??? Last but > >certainly not least, how many mainframe guys know IP networking. You provide > >me a listAnswer is very few. Many PBX or Telecomm Engineer knows VOIP or IP > >Telephony?? Answer is very few. Giving me dates when things start is like > >tell me that we still need to go print a circuit board for two days and use > >tubes, diodes, and transistors, instead a sing microprocessor. > > > >Finally, There are many people with 20 years of experience who feel that > >they dont need to learn new technologies and therefore still trying fight > >progress. We do not know every thing out there but at least we can try to be > >knowledge as possible. > > > > You need to be more appreciative of people who want to be the best. Be > >weather it be CCIE or Cissp. They have to study just like any other > >professional. If my doctor doesnt put in at least 100 hours of training and > >giving me a diagnostic, I will sue his pants off. > > > >Stop being an idiot Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44667&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
I thought the "experience versus certification" debate had finally died a few days ago, but now it resurfaces over on the professional list. I may as well weigh in. The problem here is clear. Some folks with lots of experience are scared (or merely offended) that some manager or client might think some relative newbie with great-sounding certs is as good or better (or even nearly as good) as the more experienced folks. Many of these experienced people gained their experience in difficult or underpaid conditions. The last thing they want is some ambitious upstart invaders studying hard in the lab, then walking into their field and being treated as their peers. The "experience is everything" crowd should relax right now, because in this economy, they are in the driver's seat. One the other hand, the lab rats, myself included, are justifiably scared. We knew that if by studying hard we managed to reach a higher position than our experience alone would justify, we might face some hostility from those with lots of experience. Now, however, we are given to understand that for employers right now, experience is king, since there are plenty of folks with lots of experience and good certs to fill all positions that HAVE to be filled (as opposed to those positions that employers advertise but are in no hurry to fill). Then, there's the common complaint that, "I'm always having to fix the networks screwed up by the paper-CCNAs, paper-MCSEs, Lab Rats, etc."I have enough experience to know that plenty of the screwing-up of networks is done by folks with lots of experience. It doesn't take long in the field to run across an arrogant but extremely experienced guy who thinks he is the only person in his company who knows anything, and then proceeds to break things that he then cannot fix. A little humility is called for in a field where almost no one can know everything and where most of the greatest gurus make glaring errors. Best regards, Tom Larus "Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > At 1:49 PM -0400 5/21/02, Thompson Alton wrote: > >Your comments are false and you sound very ignorant. > >I work with guys who have 20 years experience and to trouble shoot a problem > >take months. > > I suggest, Sir, that you examine your logic. > > The Internet and predecessors (including enterprise networks) are at > least 20-30 years old. I first used a time-sharing computer, with > remote access, about 1968. > > Cisco certification is under 10 years old. > > The Internet and its predecessors worked before Cisco certification > > Some people with 20 years experience, therefore, MUST be very > knowledgeable on protocols. Other people with 20 years experience > are not. > > >This is because they don't know how the protocols work. How > >much money can a company afford to lose when production is downloading for a > >considerable amount of time? That's why as a mangersm we send Engineers on > >training to learn about new and merging technologies. And thatms before you > >can put or do any upgrades to the production network you must first try it > >out in the lab. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44670&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
"Last but certainly not least, how many mainframe guys know IP networking. You provide me a list?Answer is very few. " Not where I work. I know and have worked with quite a few "mainframe guys" (and at least one extremely knowledgeable mainframe gal - although I'm not sure she'd appreciate the term) who are also quite comfortable with IP (i.e. to CCNP level at least, although they don't all have the certs). ALL of the mainframe comms people I work with, and probably all of the mainframe OS people as well, have at least a basic understanding of IP networking. After all, these days mainframes run IP. The mainframe world hasn't stood still over the last twenty years, any more than the IP world, and anyone with ten year old mainframe experience is likely to be lost in a current mainframe environment. I'd be quite happy about somebody with twenty years network experience - or 3 months, for that matter - applying a network change without first lab testing - *in certain circumstances*. I have done it myself several times, because in those particular situations, testing in a lab environment wasn't feasible and wouldn't have picked up the most likely problems anyway. What I *wouldn't* be happy about would be somebody (of any experience level) doing so if they hadn't had their plans and design well checked, hadn't weighed up the risks, couldn't say what their post-install checks would be, what their monitoring plans were, and what their contingency plans were. In my opinion common sense beats both certs and experience hands down, and fortunately none of them are mutually exclusive. Pity common sense isn't easily tested for (and anyway, even the most sensible people tend to have "what the hell did I do that for" episodes occasionally). JMcL Important: This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is confidential, commercially valuable or subject to legal or parliamentary privilege. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure, use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited by several Commonwealth Acts of Parliament. If you have received this communication in error please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44674&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
Whadda ya mean remember? We still have them and we have to support them as well as TR, Ethernet , SNA, Cisco,IP,Cabletron, Coax, etc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 12:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653] Do you remember Mainframe systems??? Do you remember LU and PU and logic controllers?? Do they all work the same as IP networks or VOIP and IP telephony networks? Do you know all the traffic in your data network??? You seem to be bitter about something. Do you want someone with 20 years experience Appling a network change without testing out first in a lab environment??? Last but certainly not least, how many mainframe guys know IP networking. You provide me a listAnswer is very few. Many PBX or Telecomm Engineer knows VOIP or IP Telephony?? Answer is very few. Giving me dates when things start is like tell me that we still need to go print a circuit board for two days and use tubes, diodes, and transistors, instead a sing microprocessor. Finally, There are many people with 20 years of experience who feel that they dont need to learn new technologies and therefore still trying fight progress. We do not know every thing out there but at least we can try to be knowledge as possible. You need to be more appreciative of people who want to be the best. Be weather it be CCIE or Cissp. They have to study just like any other professional. If my doctor doesnt put in at least 100 hours of training and giving me a diagnostic, I will sue his pants off. Stop being an idiot Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44676&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
At 03:56 PM 5/21/02, Thompson Alton wrote: >Do you remember Mainframe systems??? Yes. (And if you were asking Howard, the answer is emphatically YES ;-) >Do you remember LU and PU and logic >controllers?? Yes. >Do they all work the same as IP networks or VOIP and IP >telephony networks? Yes, pretty much. Networking 30, 20, 10 years ago dealt with the same stuff we're still dealing with today: layers cables wireless (not as much as there is now, but definitely some) circuits (both virtual and real) connectionless versus connection-oriented reliability versus low overhead connection establishment and teardown flow control windowing packetization signaling error detection error correction ACKs and NACKs and WAKs (WAKs kind of fell out of favor) dynamic and static addressing dynamic and static routing pesky users security (although the old-timers should have done better with this ;-) network management transferring files and other data database lookups You get the picture. >Do you know all the traffic in your data network??? You seem to be bitter >about something. Do you want someone with 20 years experience Appling a >network change without testing out first in a lab environment??? Some changes can't be tested in a lab. They could be phased in carefully instead. With good design, testing, troubleshooting methodology, I would be OK with this. >Last but >certainly not least, how many mainframe guys know IP networking. Many. (Gals too.) > You provide >me a listAnswer is very few. Many PBX or Telecomm Engineer knows VOIP or IP >Telephony?? They're learning. (This is an issue the other way around too, of course. I really struggled with voice at first due to a lack of PBX, telephony knowledge, but I did OK finally, got my CVOICE cert whoopee.) >Answer is very few. Giving me dates when things start is like >tell me that we still need to go print a circuit board for two days and use >tubes, diodes, and transistors, instead a sing microprocessor. > >Finally, There are many people with 20 years of experience who feel that >they dont need to learn new technologies and therefore still trying fight >progress. Most old-timers aren't that way, though. >We do not know every thing out there but at least we can try to be >knowledge as possible. > > You need to be more appreciative of people who want to be the best. Be >weather it be CCIE or Cissp. They have to study just like any other >professional. If my doctor doesnt put in at least 100 hours of training and >giving me a diagnostic, I will sue his pants off. Lab rats do deserve respect, if that's your point. To get a CCIE is extremely difficult, whether you did it with experience or not. Gotta run. Hope I didn't babble too much. ;-) > >Stop being an idiot Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44681&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
Amen to that. Humility is called for on both sides. Apparently I've been tagged around here as the 'King Experience' guy. The very ironic thing is that on another message board, I was the person who was arguing that experience was NOT as important as other posters had indicated (this was an experience vs. college degree argument). Basically it boiled down to the fact that while experience is indeed extremely valuable, particularly nowadays, even experience can sometimes be taken too far. For example, one guy said that experience always wins no matter what (which is patently false), so I gave him the example of 2 guys, whereas both guys had good experience, but the first guy had stellar degrees from the most famous schools, all kinds of certs, a killer personality, and everything else, whereas the second guy had none of that (besides the experience ), but he had a day's more experience. Hey, if experience really beat everything all the time, then companies should always pick the second guy, because after all, he had more experience (one additional day). Clearly this is false. My point is simply this. Experience, education, certs, work attitude, etc. etc., they all form your suite of qualifications. None of them should be pursued at the exclusion of all others. In fact, the best strategy seems to be to work on your weaknesses. For example, if you have lots of certs and education, but no experience, then get experience. Conversely, if you have lots of experience, but no certs and no education, then go get certs and education. ""Thomas Larus"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I thought the "experience versus certification" debate had finally died a > few days ago, but now it resurfaces over on the professional list. I may as > well weigh in. > > The problem here is clear. Some folks with lots of experience are scared > (or merely offended) that some manager or client might think some relative > newbie with great-sounding certs is as good or better (or even nearly as > good) as the more experienced folks. Many of these experienced people > gained their experience in difficult or underpaid conditions. The last > thing they want is some ambitious upstart invaders studying hard in the lab, > then walking into their field and being treated as their peers. The > "experience is everything" crowd should relax right now, because in this > economy, they are in the driver's seat. > > One the other hand, the lab rats, myself included, are justifiably scared. > We knew that if by studying hard we managed to reach a higher position than > our experience alone would justify, we might face some hostility from those > with lots of experience. Now, however, we are given to understand that for > employers right now, experience is king, since there are plenty of folks > with lots of experience and good certs to fill all positions that HAVE to be > filled (as opposed to those positions that employers advertise but are in no > hurry to fill). > > Then, there's the common complaint that, "I'm always having to fix the > networks screwed up by the paper-CCNAs, paper-MCSEs, Lab Rats, etc."I > have enough experience to know that plenty of the screwing-up of networks is > done by folks with lots of experience. It doesn't take long in the field to > run across an arrogant but extremely experienced guy who thinks he is the > only person in his company who knows anything, and then proceeds to break > things that he then cannot fix. > > A little humility is called for in a field where almost no one can know > everything and where most of the greatest gurus make glaring errors. > > Best regards, > Tom Larus > > "Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > At 1:49 PM -0400 5/21/02, Thompson Alton wrote: > > >Your comments are false and you sound very ignorant. > > >I work with guys who have 20 years experience and to trouble shoot a > problem > > >take months. > > > > I suggest, Sir, that you examine your logic. > > > > The Internet and predecessors (including enterprise networks) are at > > least 20-30 years old. I first used a time-sharing computer, with > > remote access, about 1968. > > > > Cisco certification is under 10 years old. > > > > The Internet and its predecessors worked before Cisco certification > > > > Some people with 20 years experience, therefore, MUST be very > > knowledgeable on protocols. Other people with 20 years experience > > are not. > > > > >This is because they don't know how the protocols work. How > > >much money can a company afford to lose when production is downloading > for a > > >considerable amount of time? That's why as a mangersm we send Engineers > on > > >training to learn about new and merging technologies. And thatms before > you > > >can put or do any upgrades to the production network you must first try > it > > >out in the lab. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php
Re: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
""Thompson Alton"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Do you remember Mainframe systems??? Do you remember LU and PU and logic > controllers?? Do they all work the same as IP networks or VOIP and IP > telephony networks? > Do you know all the traffic in your data network??? You seem to be bitter > about something. Do you want someone with 20 years experience Appling a > network change without testing out first in a lab environment??? But look at it the other way. Do you want some new guy fresh off the street (or fresh off his cert) but who has no experience fiddling around on a mission-critical part of your network? I didn't think so. > Last but > certainly not least, how many mainframe guys know IP networking. You provide > me a list.Answer is very few. Many PBX or Telecomm Engineer knows VOIP or IP > Telephony?? Answer is very few. Giving me dates when things start is like > tell me that we still need to go print a circuit board for two days and use > tubes, diodes, and transistors, instead a sing microprocessor. On the other hand, who's more likely to show up to work late? Or show up drunk or high? Or get into a fight with his coworkers? Or surf porn in front of female coworkers? The guy who's been in the working world for 25 years or a new kid? Experience is not just about knowing which command does what. It's also about general work attitudes and maturity. > > Finally, There are many people with 20 years of experience who feel that > they don't need to learn new technologies and therefore still trying fight > progress. There are also a whole lot of new guys who feel they don't need to learn new technologies too. They get their nice shiny CCxx or whatever and they feel that they that's the end of the road. Pride and ignorance exist in both camps. But pride and ignorance generally exists less with the experienced guys because of "the laws of evolution". If you were always proud and ignorant and you felt you never had to learn new things, chances are you wouldn't have survived for very long in the industry anyway, so how exactly did you manage to rack up all that experience? That's not to say that there are no experienced guys who are proud and ignorant, but it's just less likely. >We do not know every thing out there but at least we can try to be > knowledge as possible. > > You need to be more appreciative of people who want to be the best. Be > weather it be CCIE or Cissp. They have to study just like any other > professional. If my doctor doesn't put in at least 100 hours of training and > giving me a diagnostic, I will sue his pants off. Aw come on now. You might have a young doc fresh out of med school who's just been studying 100 hours a week. On the other hand, you might have an old-doc who's still studying.working for 100 hours a week. So who's likely to be the better doc? Or, let me put it to you more bluntly - if you need life-saving surgery, who do you want operating on you - the guy straight out of med school or the guy who's been around for decades? Exactly. > > Stop being an idiot Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44684&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Logic and Lab Rats [7:44653]
"On the other hand, who's more likely to show up to work late? Or show up drunk or high? Or get into a fight with his coworkers? Or surf porn in front of female coworkers? The guy who's been in the working world for 25 years or a new kid?" Umm, off-topic, but enlighten me, please. Why is it worse to surf porn in front of female coworkers than it is to surf porn in front of male coworkers? What if it was a woman surfing porn in front of coworkers? Do your opinions change? ;-) JMcL Important: This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is confidential, commercially valuable or subject to legal or parliamentary privilege. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure, use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited by several Commonwealth Acts of Parliament. If you have received this communication in error please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44687&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
> At 03:56 PM 5/21/02, Thompson Alton wrote: > >Do you remember Mainframe systems??? > > Yes. (And if you were asking Howard, the answer is emphatically YES ;-) HeHe! Heck I was doing some file transfer troubleshooting on a Mainframe towards the end of last year, I got elected because I knew the switches, routers, lan/wan protocols, sniffers, nethealth, openview and somehow I recalled some of the MVS things I did 15 years ago. The mainframe people on both sides of the circuit were blaming it on the network, and our main MVS guy was going on vacation for a couple of weeks. I was able to prove that it was an MVS application problem. The main point here is that there is a heck of a lot more to think about when running a network than to worry about what the cisco equipment is doing. > > >Do you remember LU and PU and logic > >controllers?? > > Yes. > > >Do they all work the same as IP networks or VOIP and IP > >telephony networks? > > Yes, pretty much. Networking 30, 20, 10 years ago dealt with the same stuff > we're still dealing with today: > > layers > cables > wireless (not as much as there is now, but definitely some) > circuits (both virtual and real) > connectionless versus connection-oriented > reliability versus low overhead > connection establishment and teardown > flow control > windowing > packetization > signaling > error detection > error correction > ACKs and NACKs and WAKs (WAKs kind of fell out of favor) > dynamic and static addressing > dynamic and static routing > pesky users > security (although the old-timers should have done better with this ;-) > network management > transferring files and other data > database lookups > > You get the picture. So Pricilla are you saying that there are more than 7 layers in the protocol stack? Mike Mandulak NCIA (not certified in anything ;-) Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44688&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
s background COMPLETELY prepares them for desktop, server AND network/intermediate systems support. these individuals are typically roughly empirically indistinguishable from the sort you rail against, except for their current career position and related temporal factors. 2 assertions here: #1Two categories might not be enough to invoke when attempting to intelligently characterize the behaviour of the creatures who occupy the continum between lab-rat-wanna-be & digital network architecting deity. hence, the failure of my special friend, the overwhelming human tendency to simplify & break issues up into dichotomous compare & contrast sessions.. #2 A quality such as "he worked with the same exact fellers I'm branding as inflexible. therefer, he's inflexible tooo!" is not exactly compelling enough to generalize across millions of people, as your post requires in order to achieve coherency. The evils of oversimplifying matters into two possible outcomes when the truth violently contrasts with that model are part of our shared heritage, but our industry, where most ideas are at best a few decades old and profoundly run the risk of being empirically underexplored, is especially susceptible to oversimplifications, giving rise to many of the publically-aired disputes recorded in the newsgroup archives. To behave by lending legitimacy to these oversimplifications is to render yourself guilty of the behavior you condemn. - Original Message - From: "Thompson Alton" To: Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 3:56 PM Subject: RE: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653] > Do you remember Mainframe systems??? Do you remember LU and PU and logic > controllers?? Do they all work the same as IP networks or VOIP and IP > telephony networks? > Do you know all the traffic in your data network??? You seem to be bitter > about something. Do you want someone with 20 years experience Appling a > network change without testing out first in a lab environment??? Last but > certainly not least, how many mainframe guys know IP networking. You provide > me a list.Answer is very few. Many PBX or Telecomm Engineer knows VOIP or IP > Telephony?? Answer is very few. Giving me dates when things start is like > tell me that we still need to go print a circuit board for two days and use > tubes, diodes, and transistors, instead a sing microprocessor. > > Finally, There are many people with 20 years of experience who feel that > they don't need to learn new technologies and therefore still trying fight > progress. We do not know every thing out there but at least we can try to be > knowledge as possible. > > You need to be more appreciative of people who want to be the best. Be > weather it be CCIE or Cissp. They have to study just like any other > professional. If my doctor doesn't put in at least 100 hours of training and > giving me a diagnostic, I will sue his pants off. > > Stop being an idiot Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44694&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Logic and Lab Rats [7:44653]
Unfortunately, the gals in the U.S. are less apt to shrug it off their shoulders if a co-worker is checking out Female Porn... They're, shall we say, a bit sensitive to the subject... and usually immediately complain of "Sexual Harassment"... even if it's not involving them in any way. In other cultures, or at least in other countries, it's more acceptable for female porn to be prevalent... I suspect this is due to two factors though... 1. a higher male-dominating society, and/or 2. more liberal attitudes after all, it's illegal to run a brothel in the U.S., but correct me if I'm wrong... I believe this is not the case in Australia or New Zealand. Of course, if a female was caught surfing Male Porn in the U.S., she'd probably be hit on by half a dozen guys within the hour... that is, the guys that aren't with their head stuck in a Server or Network Appliance trying to solve a problem. :) Mark -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Logic and Lab Rats [7:44653] "On the other hand, who's more likely to show up to work late? Or show up drunk or high? Or get into a fight with his coworkers? Or surf porn in front of female coworkers? The guy who's been in the working world for 25 years or a new kid?" Umm, off-topic, but enlighten me, please. Why is it worse to surf porn in front of female coworkers than it is to surf porn in front of male coworkers? What if it was a woman surfing porn in front of coworkers? Do your opinions change? ;-) JMcL Important: This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is confidential, commercially valuable or subject to legal or parliamentary privilege. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure, use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited by several Commonwealth Acts of Parliament. If you have received this communication in error please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44690&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653]
Gang, To put a closure to the thread, allow me to repeat the saying... "When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience ends up with the money, and the man with money ends up with experience." (Gals, no flame please.) So please give these newbies a break. After all, didn't ALL subscribers start from square one at some point in time? Does it mean your employer let you handle the backbone links from day 1? or 2? or 3?...In my case though, I got fed to the wolves right from the get go. And with just my CCNA, yes I had to learn everything there was i could find on OSPF. Three weeks to research on and test BGP and report to the boss about this protocol before we went live. But I never claimed to be an expert. I did the best that I could. And guess what? All those theories I gathered from the books came back to me when time came to work out problems. Again, I'm not saying I knew everything there was to know about network troubleshooting. I've been in the same situation as many, many aspiring individuals who just want to enter into the profession that ALL of us applied for in the past. Has experience given people too much money that they can't remember where they came from? Thanks for all respondents. Elmer - Original Message - From: "nrf" To: Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 11:24 PM Subject: Re: Logic and "Lab Rats" [7:44653] > Amen to that. Humility is called for on both sides. > > Apparently I've been tagged around here as the 'King Experience' guy. The > very ironic thing is that on another message board, I was the person who was > arguing that experience was NOT as important as other posters had indicated > (this was an experience vs. college degree argument). Basically it boiled > down to the fact that while experience is indeed extremely valuable, > particularly nowadays, even experience can sometimes be taken too far. For > example, one guy said that experience always wins no matter what (which is > patently false), so I gave him the example of 2 guys, whereas both guys had > good experience, but the first guy had stellar degrees from the most famous > schools, all kinds of certs, a killer personality, and everything else, > whereas the second guy had none of that (besides the experience ), but he > had a day's more experience. Hey, if experience really beat everything all > the time, then companies should always pick the second guy, because after > all, he had more experience (one additional day). Clearly this is false. > > My point is simply this. Experience, education, certs, work attitude, etc. > etc., they all form your suite of qualifications. None of them should be > pursued at the exclusion of all others. In fact, the best strategy seems to > be to work on your weaknesses. For example, if you have lots of certs and > education, but no experience, then get experience. Conversely, if you have > lots of experience, but no certs and no education, then go get certs and > education. > > > ""Thomas Larus"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I thought the "experience versus certification" debate had finally died a > > few days ago, but now it resurfaces over on the professional list. I may > as > > well weigh in. > > > > The problem here is clear. Some folks with lots of experience are scared > > (or merely offended) that some manager or client might think some relative > > newbie with great-sounding certs is as good or better (or even nearly as > > good) as the more experienced folks. Many of these experienced people > > gained their experience in difficult or underpaid conditions. The last > > thing they want is some ambitious upstart invaders studying hard in the > lab, > > then walking into their field and being treated as their peers. The > > "experience is everything" crowd should relax right now, because in this > > economy, they are in the driver's seat. > > > > One the other hand, the lab rats, myself included, are justifiably scared. > > We knew that if by studying hard we managed to reach a higher position > than > > our experience alone would justify, we might face some hostility from > those > > with lots of experience. Now, however, we are given to understand that > for > > employers right now, experience is king, since there are plenty of folks > > with lots of experience and good certs to fill all positions that HAVE to > be > > filled (as opposed to those positions that employers advertise but are in > no > > hurry to fill). > > > > Then, there's the common complaint that, "I'm always having to fix the > >
Re: Logic and Lab Rats [7:44653]
Well actually, yeah it is different. Perhaps not in theory, but in actual practice. Think of the composition of the sexual harrassment lawsuits - what is the proportion of women suing men for inappropriate behavior and vice versa? Exactly. For every one case of a man suing a woman, it's gotta be like 10 or a 100 or a 1000 cases of the other way around. So, from a proportional standpoint, which is the bigger problem? It gets down to the fact that men and women are simply different, and there are different expectations set upon men and women. I know that feminists would like for you to believe that it isn't so, but we all know that it is. For example, it is simply the case that society dictates that men should want sex, but women should not. What I mean by that is that a man who is known to have lots of sexual partners will meet with much less condemnation from society than a woman who has lots of sexual partners ( in fact, that man might even be greeted with admiration). I'm not saying that "American Pie 2" was a great cinematic triumph, but this aspect of society was vividly illustrated in the Rule of Three (anybody who saw the movie will know what I'm talking about). There are many consequences to this, but one of them is that it is simply more likely that a man will behave in a more sexually inappropriate way in the workplace than a women would, simply because a woman already has to "limit" her sex-drive because of the overarching rule of society. Is this right, is this fair? No, probably not. But that's the way it is. So rather than discuss theoretical problems, I choose to discuss actual known problems that are commonplace and that I have actually seen happen with my own eyes. Yes in theory a woman might be able to offend a man, but you gotta admit that's pretty rare. wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > "On the other hand, who's more likely to show up to work late? Or show up > drunk or high? Or get into a fight with his coworkers? Or surf porn in > front of female coworkers? The guy who's been in the working world for > 25 > years or a new kid?" > > Umm, off-topic, but enlighten me, please. Why is it worse to surf porn in > front of female coworkers than it is to surf porn in front of male > coworkers? > > What if it was a woman surfing porn in front of coworkers? Do your > opinions change? ;-) > > JMcL > > > Important: This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee and may > contain information that is confidential, commercially valuable or subject > to legal or parliamentary privilege. If you are not the intended recipient > you are notified that any review, re-transmission, disclosure, use or > dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited by several > Commonwealth Acts of Parliament. If you have received this communication in > error please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this > transmission together with any attachments. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45094&t=44653 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
