Poor people can succeed, rich people can fail academically - money alone doesn't "fix" anything in education, it just makes it look nicer.
And it's clearly no more difficult to study when you have 5 siblings in a 1 bedroom household where you have no computer and eat nothing but dollar menu McDonalds with no hope of ever paying for an education than it is if you live in a McMansion with more bedrooms than occupants, have private tutors, go to private school, and have a trust fund waiting to make sure you don't have to work in college.
They are looking for things they don't tell you, or looking to confirm their programming bias.
I refuse to take programming specific test. You want to ask me question to see how I approach a problem? we can talk about it, but not in a test.
There are too many variables in the business.
Yeah. Unfortunately for me I don't have much chance moving back to the west coast without going through the big companies (ms, google, amazon) since they're about the only ones that consider out of state candidates, and they all do the stupid tests.
I recently did 2 rounds of all day interviews at a big tech company where they ask you to solve these kinds of problems. I can see the value of some programming tests to make sure people can actually code, but I saw some major flaws in their methodology. One major problem is conveying what it is you really want the applicant to do. I had several questions where I thought they wanted the algorithm to solve the problem, when really all they wanted was a library call. Another issue is when there's not one clear "best" solution. I had one interviewer tell me to code a problem optimizing for time and space complexity. He interrupted me 3 times because he didn't understand my algorithm, and when he announced the "correct" algorithm, it was actually worse time complexity and only slightly better space complexity. The biggest problem of all, though, is the questions where they want you to implement some sort of bit manipulation algorithm when doing so is both unreadable and a non-optimal approach to solving the problem.
In the end, I didn't get the job. I was out 4 days of vacation time and 2 weekends that I could have spent with my family. They were out about $4000 from the cost of flying me out and back twice, putting me up in a hotel, etc. In the end both of us would have been much better off if they had just called some references instead.
There's all kinds of resources to get them food, shelter, and jobs, but they'd rather get high instead, and most of those programs require that you remain clean.
That's your problem right there. Stop moralizing and start helping. A drug addict with a home to go to is better for everyone than a homeless drug addict.
I get what you're saying, but who is supposed to give them that home? Do *you* want the tweaker that tries to stab everyone staying in your homeless shelter? Or if you give them money to get an apartment, will they not just spend it on drugs instead? Short of physically forcing them into a location and providing everything for them (like in prison or psych ward), you can do nothing for them. If that's your solution, fine, but that really just means spending more on prisons and depriving people of their civil liberties. I guess you could have druggie hospices: you get all the drugs you want, and food and shelter, and just live out your short druggie existence there until you die from an OD.
I find plenty of lazy people in the workplace, so I have difficulty with an anecdotal observation that there is even a correlation, never mind causal relationship. Laziness does however share some easily-observable symptoms with some other problems, of which their other symptoms are easily ignored once the observer thinks that they have confirmed pre-conceived notions.
The vast majority that I ran into were punk rockers or metal fans (sampling bias: I like punk rock and used to go to shows on a regular basis in my younger years), and they all seemed to be living out some fantasy notional freedom, where freedom is defined as not having to do anything and getting drunk/high as often as you can. There was also a post-hippie cross-section I encountered that would tend to be a little bit more productive and collaborative, but only to the point at which their basic needs were met (food, shelter, and weed), at which point they would return to their finger painting or whatever.
As an aside, there was one older homeless guy that I would talk to nearly every day at the bus stop on the corner of 39th and Hawthorne. He never asked me for money, but I know for a fact he needed it. If he asked me to buy him a sandwich, I would have, but I don't think he would have ever asked. He's an example of the homeless that really need help, that deserve help, and that likely will never get help.
I lived in Portland for many years. Hell, I hung out with some of those kids, and even had roommates who were one step up the ladder (renting a room in a shithole on 82nd street). The fact is, they're lazy fucks. There's all kinds of resources to get them food, shelter, and jobs, but they'd rather get high instead, and most of those programs require that you remain clean. Also, the vast majority of them simply go back to stay with their parents during the winter months -- notice you only see them around in the spring and summer?
i'll be you have lots of black friends too. do you keep your women in binders?
Wow, you sure make a lot of assumptions. For the record, I vote in the following order (depending on my choices at the ballot): Justice Party -> Green Party -> Democrat -> Snoopy. Anyway, it's important to note that we're not talking about the mentally ill homeless population here, we're talking about able-bodied, able-minded upper middle class kids who decided they'd rather panhandle and do drugs than do something productive with their lives. Most of them are not even *really* homeless, they can go home any time they want. I'm not exaggerating or being facetious or ignorant here: these "homeless" people are gobbling up the resources that we should be spending on helping people with serious mental illnesses or who have through some unfortunate circumstance ended up on the street.
"most of them deserve it and would not contribute to society in any meaningful way"
Fuck you, you poor excuse for a limp wristed cum stain.
YOU and people like YOU are clueless fucks that would watch society burn to the ground to hold onto you belief instead of thinking.
They need help. Most haven't even been taught how to plan or work, then suddenly they are on the streets becasue they are lazy.
The do nothing parent scratch their head and can't figure out why ignoring a child for 18 years has lead to them being 'lazy'.
I lived in Portland for many years. Hell, I hung out with some of those kids, and even had roommates who were one step up the ladder (renting a room in a shithole on 82nd street). The fact is, they're lazy fucks. There's all kinds of resources to get them food, shelter, and jobs, but they'd rather get high instead, and most of those programs require that you remain clean. Also, the vast majority of them simply go back to stay with their parents during the winter months -- notice you only see them around in the spring and summer?
The US street are littered with kids whose parent did that instead of actual get professional help.
Really? Where? Reference?
Honestly, I've never heard that parents kicking deadbeat children out of their homes was a serious source of homelessness.
They're all in Portland. Also, most of them deserve it and would not contribute to society in any meaningful way regardless of whether they're on the streets or in their parents' homes.
But could you agree that anyone may need a handgun for self-defense against someone who illegally obtained a gun (which would suggest to be used in illegal activities, such as murder)?
If by "anybody", you mean anyone who has passed a mental health screening, a background check, and has proven that he or she has a secure location where the gun is stored (gun safe with both PIN and biometrics), and is trained in the usage and handling of a gun, then yes.
It's a straw man because he claims that I implied (through use of rhetorical question) guns have no purpose other than murder, when clearly my point was that guns have no purpose other than *killing*.
No. The gunman killed the kids. The gun and bullets were simply the tools used. Should all computers be banned because hackers use them to hack?
That depends, do computers serve a purpose other than hacking?
Yes they do and guns have more purposes other than killing innocents.
That's a straw man. Guns have no purpose other than *killing*. So maybe we should ask ourselves, who has a legitimate need to kill, and what tools do they need to do it? A hunter might need a hunting rifle. A police officer might need a hand gun. I'm not sure why anyone outside of deployed active duty military or on-duty swat team members need an assault rifle.
Not really. Best not to look into which hurts the common man's pocketbook more -- this cartel or the one on six people on the public dole for "stress" or "lower back pain".
You know you're full of shit, right? My mom finally got SSI disability for her back problems in 2006 after 10 years, 3 back surgeries, 3 bouts with thyroid cancer, 2 weight loss surgeries paid out of pocket to treat the weight gain caused from not having a thyroid, severe adult-onset scoliosis, and countless attempts to return to work only to have to be carried out of work halfway through her shift because she couldn't sit anymore.
Allowing the states to collect a tax isn't the same thing as imposing a tax. Not quite. Besides it's either that or the states will have to raise income and property taxes.
Then they should raise income or property taxes. Sales tax is about the worst tax there is -- it's regressive, so it hurts poor people disproportionally, and it depresses retail sales and services. If states really want their businesses to compete with amazon, they should abolish sales tax so that purchasing locally becomes more attractive.
Sure, your son is a little further up the spectrum than some other formerly-known-as-Aspies. But that doesn't mean that they don't have a bunch of difficult symptoms that qualify as a "syndrome". I certainly don't have 3 hour meltdowns over shirt color (but I have had 3 minute meltdowns over precisely that) - but I still can't recognize facial expressions "automatically", understand from intonation that something being said is rhetorical rather than literal, or know that when I've been babbling on about something that everyone around me is profoundly bored by what I'm saying, I can't keep the "correct" amount of eye contact without mentally counting how long it's been since I last looked at the person I'm interacting with.
I have screwed up in countless numbers of social situations because I'm simply unable to read between the lines in regular interactions with neurotypicals.
It's like I'm living on planet Betazed...everyone around me is "empathic" and can tell whether someone is happy or sad, interested or bored, worried or relaxed just by looking at them or magically picking up on "body language" or "intonation"...things that are almost too tiny for me to perceive even when I've been told what to look for!
I do have disabilities - they may or may not be milder than your son - but they are definitely not *normal* things.
My son is actually very, very low on the spectrum -- he's highly functional and even the neurologist thought we were wrong until she did full 4 hour evaluation on him. My wife and I both have symptoms more like the ones you describe. The difference is that it becomes a problem when it prevents you from living something within a couple standard deviations from a normal life. The difference between "nerd" and ASD is akin to the difference between "selfish" and Antisocial Personality Disorder.
Quite a few ASD adults mention that they feel that ABA therapy (the only treatment for ASD that has any statistically significant evidence that it actually works) was like a form of torture. This may be sampling bias, but I also notice that most ASD people who make this claim seem to be able to function relatively well.
No, you work with a bunch of people who *think* they have Asperger's. if you sit through one of my son's 3 hour long meltdowns because he suddenly decided his shirt was the wrong color, you'd see the difference.
Slashdot Mirror
Poor people can succeed, rich people can fail academically - money alone doesn't "fix" anything in education, it just makes it look nicer.
And it's clearly no more difficult to study when you have 5 siblings in a 1 bedroom household where you have no computer and eat nothing but dollar menu McDonalds with no hope of ever paying for an education than it is if you live in a McMansion with more bedrooms than occupants, have private tutors, go to private school, and have a trust fund waiting to make sure you don't have to work in college.
And that's why they are always bad.
They are looking for things they don't tell you, or looking to confirm their programming bias.
I refuse to take programming specific test. You want to ask me question to see how I approach a problem? we can talk about it, but not in a test. There are too many variables in the business.
Yeah. Unfortunately for me I don't have much chance moving back to the west coast without going through the big companies (ms, google, amazon) since they're about the only ones that consider out of state candidates, and they all do the stupid tests.
I recently did 2 rounds of all day interviews at a big tech company where they ask you to solve these kinds of problems. I can see the value of some programming tests to make sure people can actually code, but I saw some major flaws in their methodology. One major problem is conveying what it is you really want the applicant to do. I had several questions where I thought they wanted the algorithm to solve the problem, when really all they wanted was a library call. Another issue is when there's not one clear "best" solution. I had one interviewer tell me to code a problem optimizing for time and space complexity. He interrupted me 3 times because he didn't understand my algorithm, and when he announced the "correct" algorithm, it was actually worse time complexity and only slightly better space complexity. The biggest problem of all, though, is the questions where they want you to implement some sort of bit manipulation algorithm when doing so is both unreadable and a non-optimal approach to solving the problem.
In the end, I didn't get the job. I was out 4 days of vacation time and 2 weekends that I could have spent with my family. They were out about $4000 from the cost of flying me out and back twice, putting me up in a hotel, etc. In the end both of us would have been much better off if they had just called some references instead.
There's all kinds of resources to get them food, shelter, and jobs, but they'd rather get high instead, and most of those programs require that you remain clean.
That's your problem right there. Stop moralizing and start helping. A drug addict with a home to go to is better for everyone than a homeless drug addict.
I get what you're saying, but who is supposed to give them that home? Do *you* want the tweaker that tries to stab everyone staying in your homeless shelter? Or if you give them money to get an apartment, will they not just spend it on drugs instead? Short of physically forcing them into a location and providing everything for them (like in prison or psych ward), you can do nothing for them. If that's your solution, fine, but that really just means spending more on prisons and depriving people of their civil liberties. I guess you could have druggie hospices: you get all the drugs you want, and food and shelter, and just live out your short druggie existence there until you die from an OD.
The fact is, they're lazy fucks.
Lazy or dejected?
I find plenty of lazy people in the workplace, so I have difficulty with an anecdotal observation that there is even a correlation, never mind causal relationship. Laziness does however share some easily-observable symptoms with some other problems, of which their other symptoms are easily ignored once the observer thinks that they have confirmed pre-conceived notions.
The vast majority that I ran into were punk rockers or metal fans (sampling bias: I like punk rock and used to go to shows on a regular basis in my younger years), and they all seemed to be living out some fantasy notional freedom, where freedom is defined as not having to do anything and getting drunk/high as often as you can. There was also a post-hippie cross-section I encountered that would tend to be a little bit more productive and collaborative, but only to the point at which their basic needs were met (food, shelter, and weed), at which point they would return to their finger painting or whatever.
As an aside, there was one older homeless guy that I would talk to nearly every day at the bus stop on the corner of 39th and Hawthorne. He never asked me for money, but I know for a fact he needed it. If he asked me to buy him a sandwich, I would have, but I don't think he would have ever asked. He's an example of the homeless that really need help, that deserve help, and that likely will never get help.
I lived in Portland for many years. Hell, I hung out with some of those kids, and even had roommates who were one step up the ladder (renting a room in a shithole on 82nd street). The fact is, they're lazy fucks. There's all kinds of resources to get them food, shelter, and jobs, but they'd rather get high instead, and most of those programs require that you remain clean. Also, the vast majority of them simply go back to stay with their parents during the winter months -- notice you only see them around in the spring and summer?
i'll be you have lots of black friends too. do you keep your women in binders?
Wow, you sure make a lot of assumptions. For the record, I vote in the following order (depending on my choices at the ballot): Justice Party -> Green Party -> Democrat -> Snoopy. Anyway, it's important to note that we're not talking about the mentally ill homeless population here, we're talking about able-bodied, able-minded upper middle class kids who decided they'd rather panhandle and do drugs than do something productive with their lives. Most of them are not even *really* homeless, they can go home any time they want. I'm not exaggerating or being facetious or ignorant here: these "homeless" people are gobbling up the resources that we should be spending on helping people with serious mental illnesses or who have through some unfortunate circumstance ended up on the street.
Coincidentally I am in Portland.
"most of them deserve it and would not contribute to society in any meaningful way" Fuck you, you poor excuse for a limp wristed cum stain.
YOU and people like YOU are clueless fucks that would watch society burn to the ground to hold onto you belief instead of thinking. They need help. Most haven't even been taught how to plan or work, then suddenly they are on the streets becasue they are lazy. The do nothing parent scratch their head and can't figure out why ignoring a child for 18 years has lead to them being 'lazy'.
I lived in Portland for many years. Hell, I hung out with some of those kids, and even had roommates who were one step up the ladder (renting a room in a shithole on 82nd street). The fact is, they're lazy fucks. There's all kinds of resources to get them food, shelter, and jobs, but they'd rather get high instead, and most of those programs require that you remain clean. Also, the vast majority of them simply go back to stay with their parents during the winter months -- notice you only see them around in the spring and summer?
The US street are littered with kids whose parent did that instead of actual get professional help.
Really? Where? Reference? Honestly, I've never heard that parents kicking deadbeat children out of their homes was a serious source of homelessness.
They're all in Portland. Also, most of them deserve it and would not contribute to society in any meaningful way regardless of whether they're on the streets or in their parents' homes.
Lots of guns/lots of mentally disturbed people.
Fortunately for the rest of us, a low intersection.
You really need to clarify your sarcasm, it doesn't come across as well over the internet as it does in person.
But could you agree that anyone may need a handgun for self-defense against someone who illegally obtained a gun (which would suggest to be used in illegal activities, such as murder)?
If by "anybody", you mean anyone who has passed a mental health screening, a background check, and has proven that he or she has a secure location where the gun is stored (gun safe with both PIN and biometrics), and is trained in the usage and handling of a gun, then yes.
It's a straw man because he claims that I implied (through use of rhetorical question) guns have no purpose other than murder, when clearly my point was that guns have no purpose other than *killing*.
No. The gunman killed the kids. The gun and bullets were simply the tools used. Should all computers be banned because hackers use them to hack?
That depends, do computers serve a purpose other than hacking?
Yes they do and guns have more purposes other than killing innocents.
That's a straw man. Guns have no purpose other than *killing*. So maybe we should ask ourselves, who has a legitimate need to kill, and what tools do they need to do it? A hunter might need a hunting rifle. A police officer might need a hand gun. I'm not sure why anyone outside of deployed active duty military or on-duty swat team members need an assault rifle.
No. The gunman killed the kids. The gun and bullets were simply the tools used. Should all computers be banned because hackers use them to hack?
That depends, do computers serve a purpose other than hacking?
But the 2nd doesn't apply... it's a "Gun Free Zone". Isn't this what you wanted?
Yeah, if only those kindergartners were armed, right? FFS
Not really. Best not to look into which hurts the common man's pocketbook more -- this cartel or the one on six people on the public dole for "stress" or "lower back pain".
You know you're full of shit, right? My mom finally got SSI disability for her back problems in 2006 after 10 years, 3 back surgeries, 3 bouts with thyroid cancer, 2 weight loss surgeries paid out of pocket to treat the weight gain caused from not having a thyroid, severe adult-onset scoliosis, and countless attempts to return to work only to have to be carried out of work halfway through her shift because she couldn't sit anymore.
What a brilliant idea, having two completely defective people reproduce. The world needs another social system leech!
Yep, after all, only low-IQ people like yourself should reproduce.
I'm going to assume none of these senators have taken the Norquist pledge?
Norquist says it's okay because sales tax hurts the poor disproportionately more than the rich.
Allowing the states to collect a tax isn't the same thing as imposing a tax. Not quite. Besides it's either that or the states will have to raise income and property taxes.
Then they should raise income or property taxes. Sales tax is about the worst tax there is -- it's regressive, so it hurts poor people disproportionally, and it depresses retail sales and services. If states really want their businesses to compete with amazon, they should abolish sales tax so that purchasing locally becomes more attractive.
Repeat 3 times: "It's a spectrum condition".
Sure, your son is a little further up the spectrum than some other formerly-known-as-Aspies. But that doesn't mean that they don't have a bunch of difficult symptoms that qualify as a "syndrome". I certainly don't have 3 hour meltdowns over shirt color (but I have had 3 minute meltdowns over precisely that) - but I still can't recognize facial expressions "automatically", understand from intonation that something being said is rhetorical rather than literal, or know that when I've been babbling on about something that everyone around me is profoundly bored by what I'm saying, I can't keep the "correct" amount of eye contact without mentally counting how long it's been since I last looked at the person I'm interacting with.
I have screwed up in countless numbers of social situations because I'm simply unable to read between the lines in regular interactions with neurotypicals.
It's like I'm living on planet Betazed...everyone around me is "empathic" and can tell whether someone is happy or sad, interested or bored, worried or relaxed just by looking at them or magically picking up on "body language" or "intonation"...things that are almost too tiny for me to perceive even when I've been told what to look for!
I do have disabilities - they may or may not be milder than your son - but they are definitely not *normal* things.
My son is actually very, very low on the spectrum -- he's highly functional and even the neurologist thought we were wrong until she did full 4 hour evaluation on him. My wife and I both have symptoms more like the ones you describe. The difference is that it becomes a problem when it prevents you from living something within a couple standard deviations from a normal life. The difference between "nerd" and ASD is akin to the difference between "selfish" and Antisocial Personality Disorder.
Quite a few ASD adults mention that they feel that ABA therapy (the only treatment for ASD that has any statistically significant evidence that it actually works) was like a form of torture. This may be sampling bias, but I also notice that most ASD people who make this claim seem to be able to function relatively well.
No, you work with a bunch of people who *think* they have Asperger's. if you sit through one of my son's 3 hour long meltdowns because he suddenly decided his shirt was the wrong color, you'd see the difference.
Hes committed to only eating open sores food.
+5 punny!
Seriously, did you eat your toe cheese on stage?
U mad bro?
What? Uwe Boll challenging people to boxing matches?