Lately I've been reading a lot of ACM articles. A while back I noticed they started this same argument with a number of articles, one concerning the hypothetical solution to the P vs NP problem and one that is more real, concerning US Computer Science students.
ACM blasted the US educational system for their lack of trained computer scientists. They stated that US Universities are training Java api users and not computer scientists. They pointed out that a number of companies had been outsourcing their work because the US school systems weren't teaching the correct mathematics that an employee needed to be useful. According to ACM a number of companies even posted something along the lines of "US Applicants Need Not Apply."
In my personal experience, I would not have my job if I wasn't a dual major in Applied Math & Computer Science. Every company I applied to only looked at my Math degree when matching me for jobs in programming or software/systems engineering. 3 potential employers stated something that was eerily similar, "You can teach a mathematician to program and design software, but its nearly impossible to teach a computer scientist mathematics because they think they don't need it."
I'm not really stating a case against or for the topic. I'm stating the trends. Unless you just want to be a programmer for your entire life, I suggest learning more mathematics. Even if you don't feel its necessary now. You may find in the future that it is necessary or that you wished you had learned these mathematical concepts as they make life easier when designing complex systems.
My statements are more geared towards computer science students/professionals and not people who just like writing code.
I don't think so. There are plenty of people who believe that we shouldn't be looking outside of earth or even launching satellites to orbit the earth. So to them an aerospace engineer is just as unimportant as some people view a cashier at a corner store.
However I understand that the readers of slashdot are more technically inclined and it will sway their perception of what is important or not.
I also understand that I am an individual and speak only for myself from my own point of view.
You're right about the approach to signature checking. It makes me as paranoid as it does now that they keep raising the limit of purchase required on a credit card before they check your ID at a store.
I guess I should break out of my "everyone is mostly evil" mentality and stop worrying.
Human labor is far from a scarce resource. If anything qualified engineers and scientists are the most "scarce resource" we have. But we can classify them as laborers too, so I guess you're right.
Idiot in Suit #1 - "No one has any money in the US to buy our stuff! What should we do?"
Idiot in Suit #2 - "Uhh, lets move our production to China cuz its cheaper and get rid of all our American employees further hurting the crumby state of the economy instead of keeping them and keeping money circulating in our country."
I see your point. However, I think a bank teller and a gas station attendant are equally important as aerospace and software engineers.
I grew up in Oregon too, weird. I always liked not having to get out of my car in the rain to pump the gas.
I can't say much for the average gas station attendant, but I used to work at a Plaid Pantry, its like a 711 (for non NW people). I now work in the aerospace industry. All I can say is that small meaningless jobs give people work experience and lead to bigger jobs. You learn a lot about how to handle people in those crumby little jobs like that.
But what annoys me the most about what you just said is that you're allowed to do things via mobile phone that I've been rejected for in person. I was rejected trying to deposit a check that was signed over to me.
Do you know if they do any matching of the signature to the bank account the personal check comes out of?
Even more annoying is that my bank, unless the issuer of the check is the same bank, holds my checks for 1 or 2 days before the funds are available.
I can't believe the banks put so much faith in people.
Well, I go to the bank in person for moral/ethical issues.
I don't use direct deposit and only use online bill pay if I'm away for some reason.
The reasoning is the same reason I don't use the self-scan checkout lanes at the grocery store. Even though it can inconvenience me a little bit, I feel that the more "convenient" this world gets, the more jobs will disappear. By not using those automated services, we create demand for actual clerks and it creates jobs for others.
It might not actually work how I think it does, but until someone comes out on television and says so, I'll keep doing it.
If you watch Chariots of the Gods (find it on Google video). There's a scene that talks about how US troops start using remote islands for bases during the war. Then after the war they leave. The natives who have never seen a US soldier or airplane start making monuments to them and praying at mock landing fields for the US soldiers to come back.
I know the credibility of the movie, but people do act like that. I wouldn't say religion started as a way to manipulate people. Recently people use religion to manipulate others, but its not how it started. I feel that that is pretty clear.
99% of what goes on at JPL is public domain. You're more likely to get a straight scientist blabbering on and on about why they chose a certain material for the fuselage of a rocket and how they designed the propulsion system at a bus-stop because he's bored and talking to a hobo than anything.
The only things we don't have access to as a citizen are the defense contracted projects.
Anyone can go to JPL and go on the tour and see all the stuff they're building and working on and you'll get some lead scientist just going on and on about every single tid-bit of information you don't want to hear because you don't understand what the heck he's saying.
"Just because you don't see any bugs, doesn't mean there are, and in the case where human life is at stake you should assume there are bugs and attempt to find them whether they exist or not. But don't rule out software bugs just because you don't see them or feel you've tested 'enough'."
In general people think because they do something a lot, they think its enough. Take drinking water for instance, "well, I drank a lot of water, but I'm still dehydrated."
I think this is what he's alluding to. But again I might be wrong and we may not actually exist, this could all just be a hiccup in the cosmos.
How can you own something that doesn't really exist? Since computer code is essentially electricity and magnetism, do you own both of those as well? How much of it can you own?
Owning an abstraction is a pretty impressive feat by any party.
Girls are the reason computer science exists. The constant state of rejection computer nerds live in by the opposite sex is what fuels this discipline.
So women, indirectly, are the major contributing factor to the progression of computer science.
Damn straight. Publishing short, pointless messages saying whatever's on your mind to random intertubes strangers? Who would waste their time doing that?
Its impossible to post something sincere in response to a comment made against me without it seeming like sarcasm.
But, good one, that actually made me laugh a little.
Slashdot Mirror
Lately I've been reading a lot of ACM articles. A while back I noticed they started this same argument with a number of articles, one concerning the hypothetical solution to the P vs NP problem and one that is more real, concerning US Computer Science students.
ACM blasted the US educational system for their lack of trained computer scientists. They stated that US Universities are training Java api users and not computer scientists. They pointed out that a number of companies had been outsourcing their work because the US school systems weren't teaching the correct mathematics that an employee needed to be useful. According to ACM a number of companies even posted something along the lines of "US Applicants Need Not Apply."
In my personal experience, I would not have my job if I wasn't a dual major in Applied Math & Computer Science. Every company I applied to only looked at my Math degree when matching me for jobs in programming or software/systems engineering. 3 potential employers stated something that was eerily similar, "You can teach a mathematician to program and design software, but its nearly impossible to teach a computer scientist mathematics because they think they don't need it."
I'm not really stating a case against or for the topic. I'm stating the trends. Unless you just want to be a programmer for your entire life, I suggest learning more mathematics. Even if you don't feel its necessary now. You may find in the future that it is necessary or that you wished you had learned these mathematical concepts as they make life easier when designing complex systems.
My statements are more geared towards computer science students/professionals and not people who just like writing code.
Basic set theory is also very good database programming.
Doesn't have street view or actual photos from what I've seen but its ok. openstreetmap.org
Oh man, I'm typing this so no one gets on my case for a one-word-'lol' response.
And you thought space was big...
I almost took it seriously.
They're installing Debian, which takes approximately 18 - 19 years for a full install.
.iso images, burning and installing each disc on to every computer.
This task involves downloading 142909
I don't think so. There are plenty of people who believe that we shouldn't be looking outside of earth or even launching satellites to orbit the earth. So to them an aerospace engineer is just as unimportant as some people view a cashier at a corner store.
However I understand that the readers of slashdot are more technically inclined and it will sway their perception of what is important or not.
I also understand that I am an individual and speak only for myself from my own point of view.
I don't like putting checks in ATMs.
You're right about the approach to signature checking. It makes me as paranoid as it does now that they keep raising the limit of purchase required on a credit card before they check your ID at a store.
I guess I should break out of my "everyone is mostly evil" mentality and stop worrying.
Human labor is far from a scarce resource. If anything qualified engineers and scientists are the most "scarce resource" we have. But we can classify them as laborers too, so I guess you're right.
Idiot in Suit #1 - "No one has any money in the US to buy our stuff! What should we do?"
Idiot in Suit #2 - "Uhh, lets move our production to China cuz its cheaper and get rid of all our American employees further hurting the crumby state of the economy instead of keeping them and keeping money circulating in our country."
Idiot in Suit #1 - "Dude,you're such a genius."
I see your point. However, I think a bank teller and a gas station attendant are equally important as aerospace and software engineers.
I grew up in Oregon too, weird. I always liked not having to get out of my car in the rain to pump the gas.
I can't say much for the average gas station attendant, but I used to work at a Plaid Pantry, its like a 711 (for non NW people). I now work in the aerospace industry. All I can say is that small meaningless jobs give people work experience and lead to bigger jobs. You learn a lot about how to handle people in those crumby little jobs like that.
Man, this is so alarming.
I'm not a fan of automated services at all.
But what annoys me the most about what you just said is that you're allowed to do things via mobile phone that I've been rejected for in person. I was rejected trying to deposit a check that was signed over to me.
Do you know if they do any matching of the signature to the bank account the personal check comes out of?
Even more annoying is that my bank, unless the issuer of the check is the same bank, holds my checks for 1 or 2 days before the funds are available.
I can't believe the banks put so much faith in people.
Well, I go to the bank in person for moral/ethical issues.
I don't use direct deposit and only use online bill pay if I'm away for some reason.
The reasoning is the same reason I don't use the self-scan checkout lanes at the grocery store. Even though it can inconvenience me a little bit, I feel that the more "convenient" this world gets, the more jobs will disappear. By not using those automated services, we create demand for actual clerks and it creates jobs for others.
It might not actually work how I think it does, but until someone comes out on television and says so, I'll keep doing it.
What types of checks are allowed? Is it all types? Personal and Paychecks?
Can you deposit a money order or cashiers check?
Is there a fee? I'm sure there is.
How long is there a delay between submitting and getting your money?
Because, other than iTunes and Firefox, the average computer user has a ton of software that they use right?
www.ubuntu.com Been using it for years and no viruses yet.
There's no basis for this idea.
If you watch Chariots of the Gods (find it on Google video). There's a scene that talks about how US troops start using remote islands for bases during the war. Then after the war they leave. The natives who have never seen a US soldier or airplane start making monuments to them and praying at mock landing fields for the US soldiers to come back.
I know the credibility of the movie, but people do act like that. I wouldn't say religion started as a way to manipulate people. Recently people use religion to manipulate others, but its not how it started. I feel that that is pretty clear.
I was essentially writing this.
99% of what goes on at JPL is public domain. You're more likely to get a straight scientist blabbering on and on about why they chose a certain material for the fuselage of a rocket and how they designed the propulsion system at a bus-stop because he's bored and talking to a hobo than anything.
The only things we don't have access to as a citizen are the defense contracted projects.
Anyone can go to JPL and go on the tour and see all the stuff they're building and working on and you'll get some lead scientist just going on and on about every single tid-bit of information you don't want to hear because you don't understand what the heck he's saying.
This kind of probing is just intrusive.
The way I interpreted what he said is this.
"Just because you don't see any bugs, doesn't mean there are, and in the case where human life is at stake you should assume there are bugs and attempt to find them whether they exist or not. But don't rule out software bugs just because you don't see them or feel you've tested 'enough'."
In general people think because they do something a lot, they think its enough. Take drinking water for instance, "well, I drank a lot of water, but I'm still dehydrated."
I think this is what he's alluding to. But again I might be wrong and we may not actually exist, this could all just be a hiccup in the cosmos.
How can you own something that doesn't really exist? Since computer code is essentially electricity and magnetism, do you own both of those as well? How much of it can you own? Owning an abstraction is a pretty impressive feat by any party.
The Googlebots have already crawled this post.
NASA didn't build it. That silly CalTech research facility built it with NASA money.
Girls are the reason computer science exists. The constant state of rejection computer nerds live in by the opposite sex is what fuels this discipline. So women, indirectly, are the major contributing factor to the progression of computer science.
Damn straight. Publishing short, pointless messages saying whatever's on your mind to random intertubes strangers? Who would waste their time doing that?
Its impossible to post something sincere in response to a comment made against me without it seeming like sarcasm. But, good one, that actually made me laugh a little.