Yes, but all those jobs require people skills and the ability to communicate well, which are covered in degrees other than Computer Science. CS majors as a group are probably uniquely unqualified since the expectations of their generalizable skills are so low. At least in Women's Studies one must write in complete sentences. Firing people by sending a message that says "self.employed=false" is frowned on in most HR departments...
Getting an entry level programming job in the US is pretty darn hard. Everyone wants experience, CS qualifications are considered theoretical, and outside-of-school qualifications aren't reflected well on a resume unless you've worked on a well-known open source project. It's easy to say, "oh, bring a portfolio of open source work", but you have to get an interview first and most of the time no one calls.
In the end I was lucky and, after two years, networked my way into a poorly-paid position in academia that let me get the experience I needed to get a real job. I wouldn't have gotten that experience from a Help Desk job, though.
It is extremely cyclical. When I was coming in there were older programmers who were happy to be able to put relevant experience on their resume and were basically in the same position I was, only with 15-30 years of experience. Right now, where I live, if you know C++ you can get a job in a heartbeat. The problem is that if you start out during a downturn, it hurts your earnings for the rest of your life. Just like taking a job in a completely unrelated field. I bet the Celtic Studies majors give up on working in their field and just start waiting tables, whereas the CS majors hold out hope of eventually breaking in.
Until college degrees are more practical or more than a few big companies have well-defined paths to bring in inexperienced people, CS majors need to learn to be less hopeful. Of course, the best suggestion I've heard so far is to go to some place like MIT in the first place.
...that he was at least annoyed by everyone declaring him irrelevant. I do agree that his age doesn't have anything to do with it, except that it leads some people to excuse his inexcusable behavior.
And that is where you and Ebert disagree. Then again, that's why he hates video games: they defy authority. They suggest that the audience has something to contribute. The authoritative establishment, including Ebert, will not go quietly into the night just because blogs, comments and video games are teaching people to participate instead of sitting quietly while we are told what to like, what the Human Condition is, what people's lives matter.
In the modern world, he'd never have had a job. Thank goodness for progress.
Re:Yes, but can they fix my Karma?
on
Plagiarism Inc.
·
· Score: 1
If you don't specify, though, they write a 5 Funny comment.
Pedophilia is a matter of power imbalance and consent; exploiting children, and one can not help but exploit children, is evil. On the other hand, plenty of people, plus the Bible, don't think group marriage is illegal, but it has been thrown under the bus in the attempt to convince straight people to stop trying to convert through force gay people. Eventually, group marriage will be judged by the same standards regular marriage is: is it coercive, unequal and exploitative? Or is it a loving association of consenting adults?
Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: 30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. 31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
Then again, my personal theory on Corinthians is simply, "Paul was an asshole." It explains everything.
Exactly. The Bible also supports slavery, murder in the name of god, rape, and polygamy. What the Bible actually says is far less important than what modern-day Christians say. Bigotry should not be allowed to hide behind anything, including the subjective interpretation of the politically-motivated translations of an edited collection of ancient documents.
The reality is that there is a lot of information that should be in the public domain, but it's in the best interest of the country/corporation/individual to keep it secured to avoid embarrassment, bad publicity or criminal charges.
People above have explained the problems with adult stem cells. If you look at the relative amounts of money poured into adult and embryonic stem cells it's not surprising that adult stem cells have produced results.
There is no group with a monopoly on making babies dead. In fact, the rate of infanticide is pretty low and in this country mostly related to domestic violence. If, instead, you are speaking to aborting fetuses, there is one group responsible for forcing women to serve as incubators for no pay, at great cost and personal risk, regardless of circumstance or even guaranteed death.
Also, mods. I now get frustrated at any awkward UI elements in any game, because I expect to be able to find a mod to reskin it, move it, replace it with Baud Manifest...
The idea that you can't run something in windowed mode baffles me.
But only until you were in competition for resources. Then, it might well have been useful to stab them in the back and take their stuff.
Also, back then you had to keep seeing the same people every day. Game theory suggests games played repeatedly will play out differently than games played only once. So our behavioral evolution is less relevant to our modern behavior than one might think.
If we're the policeman to the world, we're doing a mighty shitty job of it. I wonder what our conviction rate is on those 656,000 murders last year... (or more seriously, the seven major ongoing political conflicts.) I don't know about you, but I don't think we should be taking responsibility for anyone's actions but our own.
Though, wouldn't that mean we should be collecting overtime pay for watching the shipping lanes or something?
Rescue Time has been running on nothing but fluff and publicity. The cheap publicity stunt about how women were less productive convinced me that I'd happily quit my job rather than use their software. Hopefully these empty stunts nevertheless demonstrate to people why their software is so undesirable.
Well, in society we also assume that people are men and that women are special, different people. For example, at REI you can buy "sleeping bags" and then you can buy "women's sleeping bags". Swatch has "watches" and then there are "women's watches". It even influences what we consider appropriate behavior: women are rewarded for acting like men, whereas men are censored for acting like women, because women are acting like "people" and men are acting like "women". (citation: http://contexts.org/socimages/2010/05/24/male-as-the-neutral-default/ )
This was not always true; it used to be scandalous for women to wear pants, and "mankind" used to refer only to men. Now women can wear pants, and people argue that "mankind" is neutral, but men aren't allowed to wear dresses (citation: Barney Frank) and no one will accept that "womankind" is inclusive of men and women.
The same thing happens with other dynamics, too. The idea that "man" is an inclusive term is similar to the idea that a pale-skinned avatar is an inclusive default. It only works if you are willing to overlook the majority of people whom it does not resemble.
It referred to "human" when "human" meant "male human" because society was a patriarchy where women were considered the property of either their fathers, husbands or God. Women have since then acquired person-hood, the vote and the ability to work outside the home (thank you, industrial revolution!) Insisting on using archaic language will lead me, at least, to believe you're a chauvinistic asshole. Society has changed, language is changing with it: just live with it!
Thanks to pharmaceutical advertising placebos are now more effective than some FDA approved drugs. Their effectiveness has been consistently improving!
The one I find interesting is acupuncture. In what looked like a reasonably well-designed study it was more effective than medication and physical therapy at reducing pain, but so was the "sham" version where they stuck needles into people at random. Apparently humans have evolved to be pin cushions or something.
By which you mean, "Microsoft tried to blackmail them a year ago and they didn't budge".
I think it is valid to ask, "why this company, and not others?" The answer with Apple and HTC is obvious. The answer here also seems quite obvious.
Of course, this is exactly what patents do: allow those with the largest pile of lawyers to shut down competition and innovation. It's not a conspiracy, it's broken by design.
The only professor I had during college who espoused his political beliefs in class was a conservative economist. He taught Game Theory, which is essentially pure math, but insisted on using examples about how women should behave in order to achieve their obviously-preferred outcome of a lasting marriage supported by their husband, how to use killing of civilians strategically during war and why we should all convert to Christianity by age 22 in order to maximize the probability of being saved.
Oh, and when people didn't like how he taught, it was because he was persecuted for being a conservative. Given his definition of "conservative" as "being a jackass", he was right.
The radical liberals were all students, and had long since dismissed Marx as being ignorant of "intersecting oppressions", and so perpetuating racist institutions, cultural assimilation and sexist dehumanization. Mostly they worked to get fair trade coffee on campus (which I was a big fan of, since it tasted much better than the previous swill!)
Slashdot Mirror
The Blue Screen of Death becomes literal!
Yes, but all those jobs require people skills and the ability to communicate well, which are covered in degrees other than Computer Science. CS majors as a group are probably uniquely unqualified since the expectations of their generalizable skills are so low. At least in Women's Studies one must write in complete sentences. Firing people by sending a message that says "self.employed=false" is frowned on in most HR departments...
Getting an entry level programming job in the US is pretty darn hard. Everyone wants experience, CS qualifications are considered theoretical, and outside-of-school qualifications aren't reflected well on a resume unless you've worked on a well-known open source project. It's easy to say, "oh, bring a portfolio of open source work", but you have to get an interview first and most of the time no one calls.
In the end I was lucky and, after two years, networked my way into a poorly-paid position in academia that let me get the experience I needed to get a real job. I wouldn't have gotten that experience from a Help Desk job, though.
It is extremely cyclical. When I was coming in there were older programmers who were happy to be able to put relevant experience on their resume and were basically in the same position I was, only with 15-30 years of experience. Right now, where I live, if you know C++ you can get a job in a heartbeat. The problem is that if you start out during a downturn, it hurts your earnings for the rest of your life. Just like taking a job in a completely unrelated field. I bet the Celtic Studies majors give up on working in their field and just start waiting tables, whereas the CS majors hold out hope of eventually breaking in.
Until college degrees are more practical or more than a few big companies have well-defined paths to bring in inexperienced people, CS majors need to learn to be less hopeful. Of course, the best suggestion I've heard so far is to go to some place like MIT in the first place.
...that he was at least annoyed by everyone declaring him irrelevant. I do agree that his age doesn't have anything to do with it, except that it leads some people to excuse his inexcusable behavior.
And that is where you and Ebert disagree. Then again, that's why he hates video games: they defy authority. They suggest that the audience has something to contribute. The authoritative establishment, including Ebert, will not go quietly into the night just because blogs, comments and video games are teaching people to participate instead of sitting quietly while we are told what to like, what the Human Condition is, what people's lives matter.
In the modern world, he'd never have had a job. Thank goodness for progress.
If you don't specify, though, they write a 5 Funny comment.
Pedophilia is a matter of power imbalance and consent; exploiting children, and one can not help but exploit children, is evil. On the other hand, plenty of people, plus the Bible, don't think group marriage is illegal, but it has been thrown under the bus in the attempt to convince straight people to stop trying to convert through force gay people. Eventually, group marriage will be judged by the same standards regular marriage is: is it coercive, unequal and exploitative? Or is it a loving association of consenting adults?
Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: 30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. 31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
Then again, my personal theory on Corinthians is simply, "Paul was an asshole." It explains everything.
Exactly. The Bible also supports slavery, murder in the name of god, rape, and polygamy. What the Bible actually says is far less important than what modern-day Christians say. Bigotry should not be allowed to hide behind anything, including the subjective interpretation of the politically-motivated translations of an edited collection of ancient documents.
There is a perfect translation system that extracts all content from marketing speech: earplugs.
The reality is that there is a lot of information that should be in the public domain, but it's in the best interest of the country/corporation/individual to keep it secured to avoid embarrassment, bad publicity or criminal charges.
I believe that as long as it has gills, it's not a person. Mostly this is because I hate Kevin Costner.
People above have explained the problems with adult stem cells. If you look at the relative amounts of money poured into adult and embryonic stem cells it's not surprising that adult stem cells have produced results.
There is no group with a monopoly on making babies dead. In fact, the rate of infanticide is pretty low and in this country mostly related to domestic violence. If, instead, you are speaking to aborting fetuses, there is one group responsible for forcing women to serve as incubators for no pay, at great cost and personal risk, regardless of circumstance or even guaranteed death.
Also, mods. I now get frustrated at any awkward UI elements in any game, because I expect to be able to find a mod to reskin it, move it, replace it with Baud Manifest...
The idea that you can't run something in windowed mode baffles me.
I've just started replaying Planescape Torment. While the graphics haven't aged well, the story and game play have done fine.
But only until you were in competition for resources. Then, it might well have been useful to stab them in the back and take their stuff. Also, back then you had to keep seeing the same people every day. Game theory suggests games played repeatedly will play out differently than games played only once. So our behavioral evolution is less relevant to our modern behavior than one might think.
If we're the policeman to the world, we're doing a mighty shitty job of it. I wonder what our conviction rate is on those 656,000 murders last year... (or more seriously, the seven major ongoing political conflicts.) I don't know about you, but I don't think we should be taking responsibility for anyone's actions but our own. Though, wouldn't that mean we should be collecting overtime pay for watching the shipping lanes or something?
No matter how underwhelmed most people were by it, Microsoft sure had it's fan boys even then: http://books.google.com/books?id=nzsEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PT86&ots=sJb_g6L1kh&dq=%22windows%203.0%22%20evangelist&pg=PT84#v=onepage&q=%22windows%203.0%22%20evangelist&f=false
Every technology that became big started out enthusing its supporters. If we didn't become excessively enthused about technology we wouldn't be geeks.
Seems to me the key is tolerance. We tolerate the currently-enthused, because we know we were once them and, Linux willing, will be again.
Rescue Time has been running on nothing but fluff and publicity. The cheap publicity stunt about how women were less productive convinced me that I'd happily quit my job rather than use their software. Hopefully these empty stunts nevertheless demonstrate to people why their software is so undesirable.
Well, in society we also assume that people are men and that women are special, different people. For example, at REI you can buy "sleeping bags" and then you can buy "women's sleeping bags". Swatch has "watches" and then there are "women's watches". It even influences what we consider appropriate behavior: women are rewarded for acting like men, whereas men are censored for acting like women, because women are acting like "people" and men are acting like "women". (citation: http://contexts.org/socimages/2010/05/24/male-as-the-neutral-default/ )
This was not always true; it used to be scandalous for women to wear pants, and "mankind" used to refer only to men. Now women can wear pants, and people argue that "mankind" is neutral, but men aren't allowed to wear dresses (citation: Barney Frank) and no one will accept that "womankind" is inclusive of men and women.
The same thing happens with other dynamics, too. The idea that "man" is an inclusive term is similar to the idea that a pale-skinned avatar is an inclusive default. It only works if you are willing to overlook the majority of people whom it does not resemble.
It referred to "human" when "human" meant "male human" because society was a patriarchy where women were considered the property of either their fathers, husbands or God. Women have since then acquired person-hood, the vote and the ability to work outside the home (thank you, industrial revolution!) Insisting on using archaic language will lead me, at least, to believe you're a chauvinistic asshole. Society has changed, language is changing with it: just live with it!
Thanks to pharmaceutical advertising placebos are now more effective than some FDA approved drugs. Their effectiveness has been consistently improving!
The one I find interesting is acupuncture. In what looked like a reasonably well-designed study it was more effective than medication and physical therapy at reducing pain, but so was the "sham" version where they stuck needles into people at random. Apparently humans have evolved to be pin cushions or something.
By which you mean, "Microsoft tried to blackmail them a year ago and they didn't budge". I think it is valid to ask, "why this company, and not others?" The answer with Apple and HTC is obvious. The answer here also seems quite obvious. Of course, this is exactly what patents do: allow those with the largest pile of lawyers to shut down competition and innovation. It's not a conspiracy, it's broken by design.
The only professor I had during college who espoused his political beliefs in class was a conservative economist. He taught Game Theory, which is essentially pure math, but insisted on using examples about how women should behave in order to achieve their obviously-preferred outcome of a lasting marriage supported by their husband, how to use killing of civilians strategically during war and why we should all convert to Christianity by age 22 in order to maximize the probability of being saved.
Oh, and when people didn't like how he taught, it was because he was persecuted for being a conservative. Given his definition of "conservative" as "being a jackass", he was right.
The radical liberals were all students, and had long since dismissed Marx as being ignorant of "intersecting oppressions", and so perpetuating racist institutions, cultural assimilation and sexist dehumanization. Mostly they worked to get fair trade coffee on campus (which I was a big fan of, since it tasted much better than the previous swill!)