Again, you're looking through your own value system. I can't say I disagree - people put way too much into having a "nice" car - but that is their choice. When it comes time to retire, you and I will be living the good life while they're stuck with whatever meager social security or pension they receive. But, at least they had that brand new M5 to drive around when they were 30...
Ultimately, you *shouldn't* buy a $60k car when you don't make that much in a year. We know that, and we should discourage those we care about from making those choices. In the end though, it's their choice. If they value having that car now and can somehow make the ends meet - it's their money.
Eh, it's possible to be blunt without being abusive. It's also possible to have a well-functioning team in which internal banter is seen as abuse from another observer. It's also possible that I didn't RTFA and really don't know how any of this applies to the LKML situation - but I'm sure somebody will beat me up over it.
Never buying another Sony phone after they abandoned software updates for their 2012 phones... Shipped with 2.3 when everybody else was updating to 4.1, and finally got the 4.0 update near Christmas. Later found out "Nope, we're done updating those phones, go buy a new one" less than a year after they were released.
Thanks but no thanks, Sony. I'm done with you and will not hesitate to tell others what to expect from you, either.
I don't disagree with you. There is tremendous value in the broad education you receive during a degree program, and - as you say - in the challenge. However, the greatly improved earnings potential is a significant factor for most people who go to college. "Better life" means a lot of things - more knowledge and more money both contribute.
They were proven out on less expensive hardware, but at some point you need to put the rubber to the road (so to speak). The X-47 is very much a prototype like the Y-F17 or X-32. Prove out a design, learn a bit while you're at it, and apply what you've learned to functioning production hardware. You don't go from an INS and computer in a Cessna straight to an armed combat ready drone.
That sucks... I suppose universities need a good mix of researchers and teachers. I definitely noticed professors of mine trending one way or the other, but none were so far off the deep end to make the classes miserable. Y'know, my favorite professor had a thick accent. Always said "wariables." He knew it, worked around it, and even joked about it. Unfortunately, he went to another school because he wanted to just teach but my university was pressuring him for research.
Well, I can't say I agree with your professors view that you wouldn't do better next time around. However, they do have a good point about the material. Particularly in the initial courses like chemistry or physics - there is a very broad baseline of material to cover, students may not pick it all up or may not find all of it interesting. I'm not surprised to see most students get Bs or Cs in those courses, then move up to As in the specialty courses that really interest them.
As to the issues transferring from your community college to a university... well you've got me there. I transferred from community college to university with a few Bs, but I wasn't looking to get into one of those big name schools.
By the time you get to the point where you're a math researcher, you've long since figured out that you really enjoy that type of math and those ridiculously hard problems are the ones you most enjoy working on. This is why you want students to find something in the field they enjoy doing. They'll be willing to trudge through the difficult stuff they don't like because once you start specializing, you'll get into the difficult stuff you love.
This is important. STEM is *hard*. Ultimately, GPA doesn't really matter. We sail through high school with a 3.9 (because that history research paper junior year really wasn't worth our time), hit college and suddenly get Bs and Cs. You're in an engineering program now - you're with all the rest of the students who sailed through high school and are now just average. Who cares if your slacker friends in liberal arts have better grades than you now - your 3.1 in computer engineering is going to make you more money then their 4.0 in sociology.
When I was in school, I recall there being a mention to adjust our expectations, but it really was never emphasized like it should be. At some point in those beginning courses, somebody needs to say "you're going to get Bs and Cs in some of these classes. In the long run nobody cares."
I'd shift that a bit... In high school, your grades are primarily an indication of how awake you were. In college, they're primarily a reflection of how hard you work (with a bit of brains thrown in for good measure).
As others have mentioned here, though - while you're in school there is an over-emphasis on grades which don't really matter once you're out. We need to do a better job of managing expectations. If a student is used to getting As in high school and gets Bs or Cs in their early math or engineering course, they shouldn't consider that a reason to change majors.
I'm sure we've all had a class like that. In all cases I know of, it was a new professor who really was still learning how to teach. One or even two professors like that is not going to ruin your education unless you let them. At my school, there were two professors like that which I can think of, and by the time I graduated their class averages had gotten up to the normal range and they were generally well regarded.
Make sure you include the requisite grain of salt. The blog is based on a study from over a decade ago - performed at a liberal arts college. Quickly perusing the school's website, I do not see a strong emphasis on STEM programs (I don't even see a B.S. offered, even the CS degree is a B.A.).
Not that I entirely disagree with the premise, but I think a study at a school with a broader academic base would provide more worthwhile results.
Hmm, sorry for not being clearer. My main point I suppose was the costly defensive systems in Air Force One and Marine One. The motorcades are over the top as well - you don't often hear of people in the states taking pot shots with RPGs. The only attempts that come to mind have been when the President was in the open anyway.
Anybody else find it odd that we put so much effort into protecting the president from outside threats (armored motorcades, well defended aircraft, bunkers, etc) when every President that met an untimely end met it at the hands of an American citizen?
No, you simply can't know in advance if a case is clear cut. You don't want to take the chance that the guy who everybody "knows" did it is innocent. Let some bad guys get away with it if that's what it takes, but take great care that you don't put an innocent guy away (or worse- to death).
I won't say you're not entitled to your opinion on this matter, but lucky for our society, the courts agree with me. Also, lucky for you if you're ever wrongfully accused of a crime.
Still looking at it the wrong way around - the purpose is to keep classified data off of unclassified machines, not to get the operators to "unlearn" things they've read about. I'm sure the.mil IT group would love it for somebody with authority to declassify the documents - but until that happens, part of their job is to keep classified materials off of unclassified hardware within their control. They know the stuff is out there and that they can't put the genie back in the bottle, that doesn't mean they're going to roll over and ignore their SOP. Those procedures may break down and look a bit ridiculous in the face of a major leak, but in general they work pretty well.
Slashdot Mirror
Again, you're looking through your own value system. I can't say I disagree - people put way too much into having a "nice" car - but that is their choice. When it comes time to retire, you and I will be living the good life while they're stuck with whatever meager social security or pension they receive. But, at least they had that brand new M5 to drive around when they were 30...
Ultimately, you *shouldn't* buy a $60k car when you don't make that much in a year. We know that, and we should discourage those we care about from making those choices. In the end though, it's their choice. If they value having that car now and can somehow make the ends meet - it's their money.
It's true, nobody's been named (at birth) "Amber" since some time in 1989.
Eh, it's possible to be blunt without being abusive. It's also possible to have a well-functioning team in which internal banter is seen as abuse from another observer. It's also possible that I didn't RTFA and really don't know how any of this applies to the LKML situation - but I'm sure somebody will beat me up over it.
There are no cats in America and the streets are paved with cheese!
Never buying another Sony phone after they abandoned software updates for their 2012 phones... Shipped with 2.3 when everybody else was updating to 4.1, and finally got the 4.0 update near Christmas. Later found out "Nope, we're done updating those phones, go buy a new one" less than a year after they were released.
Thanks but no thanks, Sony. I'm done with you and will not hesitate to tell others what to expect from you, either.
Can somebody mod this guy "insightful" ?
IT'S RUBBISH!!
I don't disagree with you. There is tremendous value in the broad education you receive during a degree program, and - as you say - in the challenge. However, the greatly improved earnings potential is a significant factor for most people who go to college. "Better life" means a lot of things - more knowledge and more money both contribute.
They were proven out on less expensive hardware, but at some point you need to put the rubber to the road (so to speak). The X-47 is very much a prototype like the Y-F17 or X-32. Prove out a design, learn a bit while you're at it, and apply what you've learned to functioning production hardware. You don't go from an INS and computer in a Cessna straight to an armed combat ready drone.
Why? We've been automatically landing planes on ships for decades.
Pretty sure it's been happening for a while.
Sorry you didn't get the memo... Also, why would the USAF care about landing on a ship?
Like just about all drones, it flies using GPS/INS
Also, automatic landings using a radar system is nothing new on carriers (started in 1957)
That sucks... I suppose universities need a good mix of researchers and teachers. I definitely noticed professors of mine trending one way or the other, but none were so far off the deep end to make the classes miserable. Y'know, my favorite professor had a thick accent. Always said "wariables." He knew it, worked around it, and even joked about it. Unfortunately, he went to another school because he wanted to just teach but my university was pressuring him for research.
So, I suppose you're right!
Well, I can't say I agree with your professors view that you wouldn't do better next time around. However, they do have a good point about the material. Particularly in the initial courses like chemistry or physics - there is a very broad baseline of material to cover, students may not pick it all up or may not find all of it interesting. I'm not surprised to see most students get Bs or Cs in those courses, then move up to As in the specialty courses that really interest them.
As to the issues transferring from your community college to a university... well you've got me there. I transferred from community college to university with a few Bs, but I wasn't looking to get into one of those big name schools.
By the time you get to the point where you're a math researcher, you've long since figured out that you really enjoy that type of math and those ridiculously hard problems are the ones you most enjoy working on. This is why you want students to find something in the field they enjoy doing. They'll be willing to trudge through the difficult stuff they don't like because once you start specializing, you'll get into the difficult stuff you love.
This is important. STEM is *hard*. Ultimately, GPA doesn't really matter. We sail through high school with a 3.9 (because that history research paper junior year really wasn't worth our time), hit college and suddenly get Bs and Cs. You're in an engineering program now - you're with all the rest of the students who sailed through high school and are now just average. Who cares if your slacker friends in liberal arts have better grades than you now - your 3.1 in computer engineering is going to make you more money then their 4.0 in sociology.
When I was in school, I recall there being a mention to adjust our expectations, but it really was never emphasized like it should be. At some point in those beginning courses, somebody needs to say "you're going to get Bs and Cs in some of these classes. In the long run nobody cares."
I'd shift that a bit... In high school, your grades are primarily an indication of how awake you were. In college, they're primarily a reflection of how hard you work (with a bit of brains thrown in for good measure).
As others have mentioned here, though - while you're in school there is an over-emphasis on grades which don't really matter once you're out. We need to do a better job of managing expectations. If a student is used to getting As in high school and gets Bs or Cs in their early math or engineering course, they shouldn't consider that a reason to change majors.
I'm sure we've all had a class like that. In all cases I know of, it was a new professor who really was still learning how to teach. One or even two professors like that is not going to ruin your education unless you let them. At my school, there were two professors like that which I can think of, and by the time I graduated their class averages had gotten up to the normal range and they were generally well regarded.
Make sure you include the requisite grain of salt. The blog is based on a study from over a decade ago - performed at a liberal arts college. Quickly perusing the school's website, I do not see a strong emphasis on STEM programs (I don't even see a B.S. offered, even the CS degree is a B.A.).
Not that I entirely disagree with the premise, but I think a study at a school with a broader academic base would provide more worthwhile results.
Hmm, sorry for not being clearer. My main point I suppose was the costly defensive systems in Air Force One and Marine One. The motorcades are over the top as well - you don't often hear of people in the states taking pot shots with RPGs. The only attempts that come to mind have been when the President was in the open anyway.
heh, was about to say "Yeah!! Just like Chrysler!" until I hit your caveat at the end there...
Anybody else find it odd that we put so much effort into protecting the president from outside threats (armored motorcades, well defended aircraft, bunkers, etc) when every President that met an untimely end met it at the hands of an American citizen?
No, you simply can't know in advance if a case is clear cut. You don't want to take the chance that the guy who everybody "knows" did it is innocent. Let some bad guys get away with it if that's what it takes, but take great care that you don't put an innocent guy away (or worse- to death).
I won't say you're not entitled to your opinion on this matter, but lucky for our society, the courts agree with me. Also, lucky for you if you're ever wrongfully accused of a crime.
Still looking at it the wrong way around - the purpose is to keep classified data off of unclassified machines, not to get the operators to "unlearn" things they've read about. I'm sure the .mil IT group would love it for somebody with authority to declassify the documents - but until that happens, part of their job is to keep classified materials off of unclassified hardware within their control. They know the stuff is out there and that they can't put the genie back in the bottle, that doesn't mean they're going to roll over and ignore their SOP. Those procedures may break down and look a bit ridiculous in the face of a major leak, but in general they work pretty well.
As long as he gets a fair trial (and by fair I mean a death sentence)
I for one am elated that you are not allowed to define what is meant by a "fair trial."