Lets just hope that no one decides that you should be sterilized, or your head drilled and you pleasure removed. When people usually think of these things, its always someone else who is deserving. What happens, like it did in Germany, It would end up some government functionary would decide you would benefit from such a change, because they did not like your attitude, habits, political or religious affiliation or maybe race. There would be a rule, some criteria for deciding who. Like we have problems with the no-fly lists, your name might just end up on the list of those to be, "Bettered".
I bought a Soda Stream and when I opened the box there was a piece of paper saying that you are licencing the soda stream technology, not buying it. I looked and there was small print in a pargraph on the side saying the same thing. I think it said it was a transferable licence and that you could only use it for the purposes intended by soda stream.
This is the first attempt I have seen that a kitchen appliance is being sold with the idea that you are not buying the appliance, and will never own it, just licence it. That strikes at the heart of the 'buying' something at the store. This is an attempt at a business model that maintains control of your carbonated water maker in perpetuity. I look forward to the test for this business model in court.
No the gun and the bullets killed the kids, the gunman used the killing machines and pointed them in the right direction with the intent to kill. If the killer had had a knife, at least he would have had to work for those kills, it would have taken more time, more kids might have been saved, the teachers would have had a chance to get between him and the kids and maybe subdue him.
Guns are efficient , impersonal tools that allow people to engage in killing in very impersonal ways, like a video game. I suspect we have more death and injury from guns because they can reach out and kill without the shooter being at risk or having to work for the kill. Too easy, to impersonal so we end up at risk.
I for one when I have to go to the bathroom really badly can miss the combination on the bathroom a few times before success. I suspect if there is a shooter around the same would hold. Also if a gun wielding person (don't want to leave out the ladies) comes into the classroom, what would you think he would do if he saw the teacher start opening the safe?
I am sick and tired of the NRA knee jerk activists that are first to scream, don't call attention to the fact that we want to keep our guns, lots of guns, semi automatic people killing guns because of a flawed Supreme Court decision, in the face of yet another MASS shooting of innocent people in public areas, Theaters, Malls, Schools. Its not just the people that do the killing, its the guns, the gun culture, the easy access to guns. Criminals can get easy access to guns because there are so many around to buy or steal. If they were rare, the price would be higher and you would have fewer criminals being able to afford guns (free market supply side economics at work, how can you argue with that). The specious argument that it is people not guns that do the killing, I would argue that a person without a gun would not be able to go into a school and kill 20 children , or into a theater and mow down rank after rank of people in a easy, impersonal way.
Lets have some sanity about guns as a privileged and not a right or if you like a right that is regulated in a sane way that prevents or make this kind of travesty rare.
The gun lobby has no solution to this problem. They are silent on the matter and want you to be silent too.
The difference is the University programs are designed to (one might argue against particular schools or programs but in general). give an overall coverage of all the important areas of the topic to give a well rounded person in the field. It is possible to read the text books yourself, but doing the projects and getting the feedback and someone to answer the questions is a more complete and concentrated study.
You can fill in a gap here and a gap there but if you have no immediate need you probably won't go through the trouble to really study something, and the more important point, is often you don't know what you should know to be able to ask the question of find the information you need or a different better way to approach some problem.
So they are not equivalent but the information is out there.
University education is not just to get a job. The unfortunate misconception is that that is the only reason you go to school. Or to state it a different way, Universities are not trade schools, never have, nor should never be.They teach fields of study, how the think, review the theories, ideas and practices of a field, give you access to other fields of study so you understand more than just one field.
You learn how to think critically, how to do research, how to present ideas clearly (or at least those are goals). So in the end you come out a better more well rounded person with skills that are applicable in many fields of endevour.
I have noticed a very big difference in self taught and university taught programmers. The difference can be striking with the university taught, having studied multiple languages and problem spaces are more easily able to learn new things and are not trapped in a single language/tool space for solutions.
That is not to say self taught programmers are bad, many are quite capable but would be much better deeper level programmers if they had also sudied, say OOP or OAD and Data Structures and Analysis of algorithms, and some AI and some Business Programming and Some Database design and programming. Usually the biggest deficit I see is the Data Structures and analysis of algorithms part with is much more difficult to pick up DIY unless the programmer is very motivated.
The problem is that many employers are wanting to get programmers on the cheap (offshore presure) and don't and can't see the value of real engineering that goes into programming. To them is all code and one program is like the next. Not so my friend.
Your kidding right? Evolution as a process, like most scientific theories it has predictive and explanatory power. We see that evolution happens, take drug resistant bacteria. We see how with selective breeding in just a few thousand years we can have widely divergent dog breeds and types of plants. In our world of computers, Genetic algorithms can solve difficult problems by just following those parts of genetics that combine parts of solutions and introduces mutations and a survival rule that culls the herd. It works, I have done that. I have come up with 'intelligent' answers to problems that the only driving principle was survival, not some unseen intelligent force. So we know that the process of Evolution is a fact and practical. The teaching of creationism on the other hand is a cop out. They claim the world is 6000 years old, they claim dinosaurs co-existed with man (and woman), that man (and woman) suddenly appeared full sized and full figured in God's image (he must have been a Black Man then). That the scientists have it all wrong about radioactive decay and tree rings and layers of sediment to show when things happened. They are much like some segments of the political parties that have no problem of making up facts to fit their theories. And also we know they think that Rape is part of God's design.
I'm sorry but there is no equivalence here. None. It is the same equivalence that is being drawn by those in politics that say that both political parties are the same. A little rational thought is in order.
I applaude the UK for this position. It is about time. One of the tenates of the Anglican Church is that you can use your rational mind to interpret the scriptures. You can see here that the Church of England's influence has had a rational effect on the Government that we don't see here in the Evangelical, bible belt, earth was created in 4006 BC. states (like Louisiana) that is just starting to require teaching creationism in schools.
I can see some company step up and for an extra price will solder those to a board with pins. If done right the cost should not be too much. But it is sad that Intel would not think that there was a thriving inventive market out there providing new ideas and invention using their technology.
I'm sure the first time a police officer asks for a bribe to let you out of a traffic ticket or slams you against the ground because he did not like the bumber stickers on your car, you will wish that the whole episode was being recorded. We have seen a few officers caught on tape being mean violent bullies have to pay the piper. Without those pieces of video it is the revered representative of the law's word against yours. The court usually favors its own and they know it.
That is not to say that more than a small percentage of law officers are bad seed, but this they are paid by the public to do the publics work in law enforcement and they are and should be beholding to us as their bosses and be held to a very high standard of conduct. Most law officers do their duty honorably but those that don't should be held account or we drop into a police state.
Here is where your voice can be heard. Send an email to your Senator, your Congressman and the party leader, President Obama and let them know your feelings about whether that is really the will of the people and not the for the special interest of law enforcement at the expense of the rest of the citizenry.
Ah yes, but algorithms are the path to enlightened code. Just like the practices of chanting certain phases, or solving a koan, or going through the steps of the Masons.
Let me use another analogy (actually programming is the art of analogy). Chess.
You have a board. (defined totally) You have pieces
Their characteristics are defined. Where they start. how they move. You have initial piece placement. You have some special rules (pawn en passant, castling, pawn promotion, responding to check, not moving into check) You have the end (king check mate)
A start, a path, and end. Just like programming. but there are many paths, to the point that the problem is so complex that there are people that are beginners and people that are Chess Masters. Is there a difference in a game between Chess Masters vs beginners. Only someone with a good level of understanding of the game maybe could tell. It is just pieces on a board moved around, must be craft right?
J2EE does allow a lot of latitude. One might argue too much. Initially.NET allowed simple solutions more easily. I remember a 45 minute intensive workshop at one Java One to implement a J2EE 'Hello World' app. Whats wrong with that picture?
We are given languages that give us functional verbs. We extend that set of verbs with our method writing towards a higher level, problem domain language to make it easier and more direct to say the solution to our problem in that higher level language. The frameworks are just specific languages that sometimes solve a different problem than you have on hand, but in some organizations you need to use that language for all applications. Like a maze of one way streets, sometimes your route to a solution with a framework can take you far afield.
Libraries are just bundles of sub-dialect that can pre-fill gaps in the language you are dealing with. But then I don't much care which language you are dealing with, it gets down to the Data Structures and Algorithms. I did Java for about 10 years and moved over to a Microsoft shop and do C# and VB.Net. Just different accents of the same language actually, but the coding is essentially the same.
Its true much of programming especially in big shops is craft. Small shops, startups can be different, or even in large shops, the right brain leap into novel solutions is art. You make of it what you will. There are craftsmen and artists in the IT world. I have been lucky to get my share of art done. Art is an approach, like Martial Arts, you never hear of Martial Craftsmen, although that is much of who the ones learning the art are, like a draftsmen working for an architect. The aspiration it to climb up to be part of the Art. One aspires to understanding that allows more creative solutions rather than tab A into Slot A.
Ah, There is the difference, just as you might say that a novelist is a craftsman rather than an artist. There is a level of understanding and experience that transforms the craft to an art. If you only think of it as a craft then for you it is a craft and will always be a craft, but as the best engineering is invisible, the same is said for an artfully crafted program, with all the considerations and degrees of freedom handled, with the flow natural and maintainable. As there is an art to poetry which is just words and sentences pieced together , there is an art to programming as well. In the construction world there are carpenters, builders and architects. The architects are the artists at the top. The craft is below. It is much easier to do the art when you have wide ranging control. So not all environments allow the practice of that art. I hope at some time in the future you have that opportunity.
After working for 40 years in IT and 27 years teaching CS at Northwestern part time I would say that a lot of the young programmers don't have a real sense of programming. They feel that knowing a particular framework is programming, or using a particular package is programming. But the deep programming comes from the Data Structures and algorithms used and the patterns used. There is an art to programming much of which comes with time, experience and study. So you may not be fashionable if you don't have all the latest acronyms on your resume but if you don't know the DS and Alg. you are just window dressing.
The pigeon. Carrier Pigeons are extinct, maybe they can take the DNA and do a Jurasic Park on it and bring them back. Proably less scary than a Rapor. Or was that passenger pigeon? which is not with us any longer?
Now Apple is going to put Chinese workers out of a job. I can see it in 20 years, the CEO and CTO the only ones raking in the money, in their automated office with roomba's (made in Poland) cleaning up the office after hours and their Google driverless cars taking them home, to their Toyota robot butler opening the door...
"something credible" sorry, the fellow is a clown and a bad actor. (every see him cry? or get angry?, not even a b-adult movie director would hire him. )
Slashdot Mirror
Lets just hope that no one decides that you should be sterilized, or your head drilled and you pleasure removed. When people usually think of these things, its always someone else who is deserving. What happens, like it did in Germany, It would end up some government functionary would decide you would benefit from such a change, because they did not like your attitude, habits, political or religious affiliation or maybe race. There would be a rule, some criteria for deciding who. Like we have problems with the no-fly lists, your name might just end up on the list of those to be, "Bettered".
I bought a Soda Stream and when I opened the box there was a piece of paper saying that you are licencing the soda stream technology, not buying it. I looked and there was small print in a pargraph on the side saying the same thing. I think it said it was a transferable licence and that you could only use it for the purposes intended by soda stream.
This is the first attempt I have seen that a kitchen appliance is being sold with the idea that you are not buying the appliance, and will never own it, just licence it. That strikes at the heart of the 'buying' something at the store. This is an attempt at a business model that maintains control of your carbonated water maker in perpetuity. I look forward to the test for this business model in court.
No the gun and the bullets killed the kids, the gunman used the killing machines and pointed them in the right direction with the intent to kill. If the killer had had a knife, at least he would have had to work for those kills, it would have taken more time, more kids might have been saved, the teachers would have had a chance to get between him and the kids and maybe subdue him.
Guns are efficient , impersonal tools that allow people to engage in killing in very impersonal ways, like a video game. I suspect we have more death and injury from guns because they can reach out and kill without the shooter being at risk or having to work for the kill. Too easy, to impersonal so we end up at risk.
I for one when I have to go to the bathroom really badly can miss the combination on the bathroom a few times before success. I suspect if there is a shooter around the same would hold. Also if a gun wielding person (don't want to leave out the ladies) comes into the classroom, what would you think he would do if he saw the teacher start opening the safe?
I am sick and tired of the NRA knee jerk activists that are first to scream, don't call attention to the fact that we want to keep our guns, lots of guns, semi automatic people killing guns because of a flawed Supreme Court decision, in the face of yet another MASS shooting of innocent people in public areas, Theaters, Malls, Schools. Its not just the people that do the killing, its the guns, the gun culture, the easy access to guns. Criminals can get easy access to guns because there are so many around to buy or steal. If they were rare, the price would be higher and you would have fewer criminals being able to afford guns (free market supply side economics at work, how can you argue with that). The specious argument that it is people not guns that do the killing, I would argue that a person without a gun would not be able to go into a school and kill 20 children , or into a theater and mow down rank after rank of people in a easy, impersonal way.
Lets have some sanity about guns as a privileged and not a right or if you like a right that is regulated in a sane way that prevents or make this kind of travesty rare.
The gun lobby has no solution to this problem. They are silent on the matter and want you to be silent too.
The difference is the University programs are designed to (one might argue against particular schools or programs but in general). give an overall coverage of all the important areas of the topic to give a well rounded person in the field. It is possible to read the text books yourself, but doing the projects and getting the feedback and someone to answer the questions is a more complete and concentrated study.
You can fill in a gap here and a gap there but if you have no immediate need you probably won't go through the trouble to really study something, and the more important point, is often you don't know what you should know to be able to ask the question of find the information you need or a different better way to approach some problem.
So they are not equivalent but the information is out there.
University education is not just to get a job. The unfortunate misconception is that that is the only reason you go to school. Or to state it a different way, Universities are not trade schools, never have, nor should never be.They teach fields of study, how the think, review the theories, ideas and practices of a field, give you access to other fields of study so you understand more than just one field.
You learn how to think critically, how to do research, how to present ideas clearly (or at least those are goals). So in the end you come out a better more well rounded person with skills that are applicable in many fields of endevour.
I have noticed a very big difference in self taught and university taught programmers. The difference can be striking with the university taught, having studied multiple languages and problem spaces are more easily able to learn new things and are not trapped in a single language/tool space for solutions.
That is not to say self taught programmers are bad, many are quite capable but would be much better deeper level programmers if they had also sudied, say OOP or OAD and Data Structures and Analysis of algorithms, and some AI and some Business Programming and Some Database design and programming. Usually the biggest deficit I see is the Data Structures and analysis of algorithms part with is much more difficult to pick up DIY unless the programmer is very motivated.
The problem is that many employers are wanting to get programmers on the cheap (offshore presure) and don't and can't see the value of real engineering that goes into programming. To them is all code and one program is like the next. Not so my friend.
Your kidding right? Evolution as a process, like most scientific theories it has predictive and explanatory power. We see that evolution happens, take drug resistant bacteria. We see how with selective breeding in just a few thousand years we can have widely divergent dog breeds and types of plants. In our world of computers, Genetic algorithms can solve difficult problems by just following those parts of genetics that combine parts of solutions and introduces mutations and a survival rule that culls the herd. It works, I have done that. I have come up with 'intelligent' answers to problems that the only driving principle was survival, not some unseen intelligent force. So we know that the process of Evolution is a fact and practical. The teaching of creationism on the other hand is a cop out. They claim the world is 6000 years old, they claim dinosaurs co-existed with man (and woman), that man (and woman) suddenly appeared full sized and full figured in God's image (he must have been a Black Man then). That the scientists have it all wrong about radioactive decay and tree rings and layers of sediment to show when things happened. They are much like some segments of the political parties that have no problem of making up facts to fit their theories. And also we know they think that Rape is part of God's design.
I'm sorry but there is no equivalence here. None. It is the same equivalence that is being drawn by those in politics that say that both political parties are the same. A little rational thought is in order.
I applaude the UK for this position. It is about time. One of the tenates of the Anglican Church is that you can use your rational mind to interpret the scriptures. You can see here that the Church of England's influence has had a rational effect on the Government that we don't see here in the Evangelical, bible belt, earth was created in 4006 BC. states (like Louisiana) that is just starting to require teaching creationism in schools.
I hope we catch the rational bug soon.
Go UK
I can see some company step up and for an extra price will solder those to a board with pins. If done right the cost should not be too much. But it is sad that Intel would not think that there was a thriving inventive market out there providing new ideas and invention using their technology.
I'm sure the first time a police officer asks for a bribe to let you out of a traffic ticket or slams you against the ground because he did not like the bumber stickers on your car, you will wish that the whole episode was being recorded. We have seen a few officers caught on tape being mean violent bullies have to pay the piper. Without those pieces of video it is the revered representative of the law's word against yours. The court usually favors its own and they know it.
That is not to say that more than a small percentage of law officers are bad seed, but this they are paid by the public to do the publics work in law enforcement and they are and should be beholding to us as their bosses and be held to a very high standard of conduct. Most law officers do their duty honorably but those that don't should be held account or we drop into a police state.
Here is where your voice can be heard. Send an email to your Senator, your Congressman and the party leader, President Obama and let them know your feelings about whether that is really the will of the people and not the for the special interest of law enforcement at the expense of the rest of the citizenry.
Looks like they were no over the property, just within eye shot so to speak.
Another gamble ups the anti.
Ah yes, but algorithms are the path to enlightened code. Just like the practices of chanting certain phases, or solving a koan, or going through the steps of the Masons.
Let me use another analogy (actually programming is the art of analogy). Chess.
You have a board. (defined totally)
You have pieces
Their characteristics are defined. Where they start. how they move.
You have initial piece placement.
You have some special rules (pawn en passant, castling, pawn promotion, responding to check, not moving into check)
You have the end (king check mate)
A start, a path, and end. Just like programming. but there are many paths, to the point that the problem is so complex that there are people that are beginners and people that are Chess Masters. Is there a difference in a game between Chess Masters vs beginners. Only someone with a good level of understanding of the game maybe could tell. It is just pieces on a board moved around, must be craft right?
J2EE does allow a lot of latitude. One might argue too much. Initially .NET allowed simple solutions more easily. I remember a 45 minute intensive workshop at one Java One to implement a J2EE 'Hello World' app. Whats wrong with that picture?
We are given languages that give us functional verbs. We extend that set of verbs with our method writing towards a higher level, problem domain language to make it easier and more direct to say the solution to our problem in that higher level language. The frameworks are just specific languages that sometimes solve a different problem than you have on hand, but in some organizations you need to use that language for all applications. Like a maze of one way streets, sometimes your route to a solution with a framework can take you far afield.
Libraries are just bundles of sub-dialect that can pre-fill gaps in the language you are dealing with. But then I don't much care which language you are dealing with, it gets down to the Data Structures and Algorithms. I did Java for about 10 years and moved over to a Microsoft shop and do C# and VB.Net. Just different accents of the same language actually, but the coding is essentially the same.
Its true much of programming especially in big shops is craft. Small shops, startups can be different, or even in large shops, the right brain leap into novel solutions is art. You make of it what you will. There are craftsmen and artists in the IT world. I have been lucky to get my share of art done. Art is an approach, like Martial Arts, you never hear of Martial Craftsmen, although that is much of who the ones learning the art are, like a draftsmen working for an architect. The aspiration it to climb up to be part of the Art. One aspires to understanding that allows more creative solutions rather than tab A into Slot A.
Ah, There is the difference, just as you might say that a novelist is a craftsman rather than an artist. There is a level of understanding and experience that transforms the craft to an art. If you only think of it as a craft then for you it is a craft and will always be a craft, but as the best engineering is invisible, the same is said for an artfully crafted program, with all the considerations and degrees of freedom handled, with the flow natural and maintainable. As there is an art to poetry which is just words and sentences pieced together , there is an art to programming as well. In the construction world there are carpenters, builders and architects. The architects are the artists at the top. The craft is below. It is much easier to do the art when you have wide ranging control. So not all environments allow the practice of that art. I hope at some time in the future you have that opportunity.
After working for 40 years in IT and 27 years teaching CS at Northwestern part time I would say that a lot of the young programmers don't have a real sense of programming. They feel that knowing a particular framework is programming, or using a particular package is programming. But the deep programming comes from the Data Structures and algorithms used and the patterns used. There is an art to programming much of which comes with time, experience and study. So you may not be fashionable if you don't have all the latest acronyms on your resume but if you don't know the DS and Alg. you are just window dressing.
The pigeon. Carrier Pigeons are extinct, maybe they can take the DNA and do a Jurasic Park on it and bring them back. Proably less scary than a Rapor. Or was that passenger pigeon? which is not with us any longer?
A Sky King moment for sure. Or was that Winky Dink?
Now Apple is going to put Chinese workers out of a job. I can see it in 20 years, the CEO and CTO the only ones raking in the money, in their automated office with roomba's (made in Poland) cleaning up the office after hours and their Google driverless cars taking them home, to their Toyota robot butler opening the door...
"something credible" sorry, the fellow is a clown and a bad actor. (every see him cry? or get angry?, not even a b-adult movie director would hire him. )
You must be hungry for dirt.
Well is looks like it was made up of a form of the work born actually.