Uhhh... are you aware of SSDs....? Admittedly they are only an order of magnitude better in some respects right now..... but they are relatively in their infancy. With the new chips being made on silicon SSD tech should not curve very close to CPU tech....
You are right you don't have to justify anything you say on here. But unless your a complete moron you realize that you are on a website and seemingly engaging in some kind of conversation. During conversations you explain things.
Try New York. The same is true and goes for Mass CT and the rest of the civilized world I have worked in.. I don't know what part of hicksvill you live in. Yes there are some particular circumstances where they have been upheld. (such as stealing your previous employers customers directly) But overall you can do what you want. Particularly if you want to switch states.. Which if your changing jobs there is a good chance you are anyway.
I to am a recent grad. My education is as an electrical engineer. I received a Masters in EE and as promptly offered a job as developer for a financial company where I will probably end up making over 100k my first year. If your stuck at a low paying programming job try and move industries. A programmer working for newegg is probably going to earn less than a programmer working at Pfizer is probably going to earn less than a programmer at Raytheon is probably going to earn less than a program at Goldman Sachs. You can easily get the idea. I can see starting salaries varying all over the board not just with skill sets or experience but what industry.
One reason is because every now and than a major paradigm shift happens or simply you find a small but very important situation where a different method will accomplish in 10 lines what 10000 lines would have required. either way its usually good to have someone with a few tricks up their bag so they can save your ass.
Earlier this century building cars was a high tech job. Many thousands of people built their life around working a job that they believed that they were uniquely qualified to do, a job they believed was valued. They were wrong. Now those people and communities are failing because they were not special and they were replaced. The same will happen to you if you base your life on working with computer science. The only difference is that its a little easier to move a development team across world. People are a little lighter than a mile long assembly line.... Outsources has already begone it ill ramp up soon enough. My guess we've got 20 years before they completely gut U.S/western world develpment... A little time but not a load... Don't get left behind when the ship breaks in half....
The only time we are going to get 3d television is once 3d holographic projectors are an established technology. This is not because of any technological limitation with 3d glasses. But simply because 3d glasses look stupid and no one will want to wear them. Plus people have a hard enough time losing their remote. Plus you wont be able to just invite X friends over to watch some TV you will have to have a set of glasses for each person. Any tech which requires 3d glasses is doomed to failure from the get go.
It may be a funny statement but as far as I know being able to launch a missile while the sub is submerged would be a huge leap forward in the nuclear arms race. Currently subs must surface in order to launch their missiles during this period they are highly exposed and subject to attack if they could do this while remaining submerged it would drastically reduce the amount of risk incurred.
" Hard science, alongside medicine, was one of the few things left accorded automatic stature and respect by most untrained lay persons. "
That statement is completely wrong. If it was true there would not have been a problem in the first place. Science deniers have long been in a very very strong minority. This is why we have failed to get global warming, or stem cell research properly funded. These idots have been standing in the way for decades this is why this world is on the brink of colapse.
After after downloading microsofts update I had to do a system restore to get my computer to boot. Over the years of using windows the single program operation that ive found most risky to use is windows update...
No science dose not require that. As an individual working with the scientific method one can only realize that events probably work this way. The idea is not that science allows us know the truth. It allows us to work towards the truth like an asimptote. It is perfectly logical to take Descartes' brain in a jar idea and still work with the scientific process. Science can be read something like this "Yes I may be a brain in a jar however all my previous experience indicate that the world acts in ways i have previously experienced, If things change I will adapt my perspective until this point i will continue to think that the world will probably act as it has before." There is no faith in that statement at all.
In history many people believed that the world is flat. There are probably more people who have believed that than have believed in a roundish world. The fact is that any number of popular beliefs have not been substantiated and thus it is inappropriate to hold them as reliable. Your claim that you have experiences with god is not, and can never be substantiated. Thus it illogical trust your claim. Any moderately intelligent theologian would tell you the same. The idea behind faith is that it is illogical and unreliable that if faith was logical and provable it would no longer be faith. In short you have no idea what your talking about. Thanks for trying.
IT is in part "religion" itself which causes the problem. religion of all kinds fundamentally teach that there is something beyond the scope of normal human understanding and logic. Once that boundary has broken in someones psyche they are damaged good. Since there is something beyond logic horrible immoral deeds which are clearly illogical for society and the person can be "justified" as being just part of that religion as the beholders already believe that they are beyond logic
You can now buy an LED light bulb for 10 bucks from Home depot. Seems like your major complaint about LED's had been solved... LEDs now pay for themselves when compared to a CFL within 1 year, and when compared to incandescent within 3 months.
I agree the numbers have been pulled out of their asses. However if you would bother to actually look at the numbers for commercially. The gains for LED's are actually a lot more beneficial than the study says. The stated life expectancy for newer LED's are around 100,000 hours. Around 10 X that of CFL's. not 2.5X. You pointlessly blaming this on the "environmental movement" Its just stupid. If anything the environmental movement would overstate the benefits of LEDs..... not underestimate......:"dumbass"....
You make a valid point however the reality is it takes far more energy to remove the heat than its own energy value. I think that a rough estimate standard number is around 4/1. So for every kWh of wasted energy you have to spend around 4 kWh removing that energy.
Bla one of googles stated goals is collect and distribute all the information in the world. To be the next great library of the world.... As we can see with current state of the search engine market. The information market as a whole is more or less a natural monopoly. You make some weird and seemingly uniformed statement about google not trying to "illegally enforce" their monopoly. There are two things off with that statement. First it implies there is a way to "legally enforce" a monopoly.... THERE IS NOT. Secondly that statement also implies that you need to use your monopolistic powers in order to be a monopoly. This is simply factually in correct. Personally i like google. Their motto of "do no evil" I like. I also will probably switch to google if they do enter the phone business. The problem is, google is becoming very very very powerful. Right now they are seemingly acting morally. There is however no guarantee that this will continue.
Filtering water is something man has been doing for hundreds of years. Id wager we have some good technology for that already. Even still if what you say is true the particulate will likely cause a drop in efficiency which will hurt profit margins but considering the efficiency of the system as is, is 0% any improvement will be significant.
The good part is that you can do a good crapy job and it still will be a major positive Considering the efficiency right now of the system is 0% a quick dirty and CHEAP solution can do nothing but provide a massive amounts of virtually free energy. This is one of these things like geothermal/solar energy. The ability to do them right requires the right land/environmental structure. In a lot of areas this will not make sense. However in the right area the profit margins are nice and high. Im not sure if people are being serious when they worry about depleting the fresh water supply or just have dry sense of humor or are drunk out of their minds(Happy Thanksgiving) . But this will not deplete the fresh water supply of the world. As far as i know there are NO technologies which can make a river flow faster into the ocean..... The environment impacts of this will be similar but less than that of traditional hydopower plants. The reason why it will be less than is that there likely will be no need for turbines.
PS. I love how in the 90s people actually believed shit like that.... Im just waiting for the day when the south finally finds that old internet mime and they start freaking the hell out(Yes I am implying that southerns are 20 years behind and very gullible) .
Although you have a good point. A couple of your examples are lax. You use tissues and copies as an example. My guess is those are either very geographical or generational specific. No one i know would ever use "xerox" as the generic. Most people i know would hardly even know the name(im finishing my masters now to give you an idea of my generation). Also here tissue and Kleenex are interchangeable here but id say neither one is totally dominant. These two issues actually bring up another point. Google is beyond all of your examples. Google is inter generation globally known. Google now has massive brand power the likes of which we have never seen before.... To be honest google could crush Cuban or Murdoch. In order to crush the business of either of these individuals all google would have to do is remove their companies from their searches. They would even have perfectly legal reason to as both of them have made "legal threats". Their companies would instantly start to hemorrhage 10's of millions.
"I work in the fields I love, and I'd recommend it to everyone else. If you want to do science, do science. If you don't then don't. Who really cares what some frigtarded academic thinks anyway?" That statement is soooo ironic its funny. You seem to indicate that science is such a worthwhile career path. Than in the next sentence you degrade academics.... do you even realize that scientists are "frigtarded academics"? Thats mentality is another reason why many of the best and brightest are leaving the field..... there is little respect for academics any more... little respect = little pay= individuals who loose motivation and go for better paying more respected positions...
Slashdot Mirror
Well amongst several things. Yahoo/Microsoft is no more or less open source than Google. So the change should um make a total of "0" difference...
Uhhh... are you aware of SSDs....? Admittedly they are only an order of magnitude better in some respects right now..... but they are relatively in their infancy. With the new chips being made on silicon SSD tech should not curve very close to CPU tech....
You are right you don't have to justify anything you say on here. But unless your a complete moron you realize that you are on a website and seemingly engaging in some kind of conversation. During conversations you explain things.
Try New York. The same is true and goes for Mass CT and the rest of the civilized world I have worked in.. I don't know what part of hicksvill you live in. Yes there are some particular circumstances where they have been upheld. (such as stealing your previous employers customers directly) But overall you can do what you want. Particularly if you want to switch states.. Which if your changing jobs there is a good chance you are anyway.
except that Non-compete clauses are basically 100% unenforceable. Its a joke that some firms still use them.
I to am a recent grad. My education is as an electrical engineer. I received a Masters in EE and as promptly offered a job as developer for a financial company where I will probably end up making over 100k my first year. If your stuck at a low paying programming job try and move industries. A programmer working for newegg is probably going to earn less than a programmer working at Pfizer is probably going to earn less than a programmer at Raytheon is probably going to earn less than a program at Goldman Sachs. You can easily get the idea. I can see starting salaries varying all over the board not just with skill sets or experience but what industry.
One reason is because every now and than a major paradigm shift happens or simply you find a small but very important situation where a different method will accomplish in 10 lines what 10000 lines would have required. either way its usually good to have someone with a few tricks up their bag so they can save your ass.
There are no "rules" To the English language. Too much was just made up Ad hoc.
Earlier this century building cars was a high tech job. Many thousands of people built their life around working a job that they believed that they were uniquely qualified to do, a job they believed was valued. They were wrong. Now those people and communities are failing because they were not special and they were replaced. The same will happen to you if you base your life on working with computer science. The only difference is that its a little easier to move a development team across world. People are a little lighter than a mile long assembly line.... Outsources has already begone it ill ramp up soon enough. My guess we've got 20 years before they completely gut U.S/western world develpment... A little time but not a load... Don't get left behind when the ship breaks in half....
The only time we are going to get 3d television is once 3d holographic projectors are an established technology. This is not because of any technological limitation with 3d glasses. But simply because 3d glasses look stupid and no one will want to wear them. Plus people have a hard enough time losing their remote. Plus you wont be able to just invite X friends over to watch some TV you will have to have a set of glasses for each person. Any tech which requires 3d glasses is doomed to failure from the get go.
It may be a funny statement but as far as I know being able to launch a missile while the sub is submerged would be a huge leap forward in the nuclear arms race. Currently subs must surface in order to launch their missiles during this period they are highly exposed and subject to attack if they could do this while remaining submerged it would drastically reduce the amount of risk incurred.
" Hard science, alongside medicine, was one of the few things left accorded automatic stature and respect by most untrained lay persons. " That statement is completely wrong. If it was true there would not have been a problem in the first place. Science deniers have long been in a very very strong minority. This is why we have failed to get global warming, or stem cell research properly funded. These idots have been standing in the way for decades this is why this world is on the brink of colapse.
After after downloading microsofts update I had to do a system restore to get my computer to boot. Over the years of using windows the single program operation that ive found most risky to use is windows update...
No science dose not require that. As an individual working with the scientific method one can only realize that events probably work this way. The idea is not that science allows us know the truth. It allows us to work towards the truth like an asimptote. It is perfectly logical to take Descartes' brain in a jar idea and still work with the scientific process. Science can be read something like this "Yes I may be a brain in a jar however all my previous experience indicate that the world acts in ways i have previously experienced, If things change I will adapt my perspective until this point i will continue to think that the world will probably act as it has before." There is no faith in that statement at all.
In history many people believed that the world is flat. There are probably more people who have believed that than have believed in a roundish world. The fact is that any number of popular beliefs have not been substantiated and thus it is inappropriate to hold them as reliable. Your claim that you have experiences with god is not, and can never be substantiated. Thus it illogical trust your claim. Any moderately intelligent theologian would tell you the same. The idea behind faith is that it is illogical and unreliable that if faith was logical and provable it would no longer be faith. In short you have no idea what your talking about. Thanks for trying.
IT is in part "religion" itself which causes the problem. religion of all kinds fundamentally teach that there is something beyond the scope of normal human understanding and logic. Once that boundary has broken in someones psyche they are damaged good. Since there is something beyond logic horrible immoral deeds which are clearly illogical for society and the person can be "justified" as being just part of that religion as the beholders already believe that they are beyond logic
You can now buy an LED light bulb for 10 bucks from Home depot. Seems like your major complaint about LED's had been solved... LEDs now pay for themselves when compared to a CFL within 1 year, and when compared to incandescent within 3 months.
I agree the numbers have been pulled out of their asses. However if you would bother to actually look at the numbers for commercially. The gains for LED's are actually a lot more beneficial than the study says. The stated life expectancy for newer LED's are around 100,000 hours. Around 10 X that of CFL's. not 2.5X. You pointlessly blaming this on the "environmental movement" Its just stupid. If anything the environmental movement would overstate the benefits of LEDs ..... not underestimate......:"dumbass"....
You make a valid point however the reality is it takes far more energy to remove the heat than its own energy value. I think that a rough estimate standard number is around 4/1. So for every kWh of wasted energy you have to spend around 4 kWh removing that energy.
Bla one of googles stated goals is collect and distribute all the information in the world. To be the next great library of the world.... As we can see with current state of the search engine market. The information market as a whole is more or less a natural monopoly. You make some weird and seemingly uniformed statement about google not trying to "illegally enforce" their monopoly. There are two things off with that statement. First it implies there is a way to "legally enforce" a monopoly.... THERE IS NOT. Secondly that statement also implies that you need to use your monopolistic powers in order to be a monopoly. This is simply factually in correct. Personally i like google. Their motto of "do no evil" I like. I also will probably switch to google if they do enter the phone business. The problem is, google is becoming very very very powerful. Right now they are seemingly acting morally. There is however no guarantee that this will continue.
Filtering water is something man has been doing for hundreds of years. Id wager we have some good technology for that already. Even still if what you say is true the particulate will likely cause a drop in efficiency which will hurt profit margins but considering the efficiency of the system as is, is 0% any improvement will be significant.
The good part is that you can do a good crapy job and it still will be a major positive Considering the efficiency right now of the system is 0% a quick dirty and CHEAP solution can do nothing but provide a massive amounts of virtually free energy. This is one of these things like geothermal/solar energy. The ability to do them right requires the right land/environmental structure. In a lot of areas this will not make sense. However in the right area the profit margins are nice and high. Im not sure if people are being serious when they worry about depleting the fresh water supply or just have dry sense of humor or are drunk out of their minds(Happy Thanksgiving) . But this will not deplete the fresh water supply of the world. As far as i know there are NO technologies which can make a river flow faster into the ocean..... The environment impacts of this will be similar but less than that of traditional hydopower plants. The reason why it will be less than is that there likely will be no need for turbines.
PS. I love how in the 90s people actually believed shit like that.... Im just waiting for the day when the south finally finds that old internet mime and they start freaking the hell out(Yes I am implying that southerns are 20 years behind and very gullible) .
Yes this actually going to be their main cash cow. Who else is going to protect us from the internet terrorists that are trolling around Slashdot. http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2008/05/12/hackers-can-turn-your-home-computer-into-a-bomb/
Although you have a good point. A couple of your examples are lax. You use tissues and copies as an example. My guess is those are either very geographical or generational specific. No one i know would ever use "xerox" as the generic. Most people i know would hardly even know the name(im finishing my masters now to give you an idea of my generation). Also here tissue and Kleenex are interchangeable here but id say neither one is totally dominant. These two issues actually bring up another point. Google is beyond all of your examples. Google is inter generation globally known. Google now has massive brand power the likes of which we have never seen before.... To be honest google could crush Cuban or Murdoch. In order to crush the business of either of these individuals all google would have to do is remove their companies from their searches. They would even have perfectly legal reason to as both of them have made "legal threats". Their companies would instantly start to hemorrhage 10's of millions.
"I work in the fields I love, and I'd recommend it to everyone else. If you want to do science, do science. If you don't then don't. Who really cares what some frigtarded academic thinks anyway?" That statement is soooo ironic its funny. You seem to indicate that science is such a worthwhile career path. Than in the next sentence you degrade academics.... do you even realize that scientists are "frigtarded academics"? Thats mentality is another reason why many of the best and brightest are leaving the field..... there is little respect for academics any more... little respect = little pay= individuals who loose motivation and go for better paying more respected positions...