Are you kidding? TF2 has been one of the most popular multiplayer games since the Orange box came out. I'm glad they're still devoting resources to it. I also realize that they've got to keep making money in order to do that. Ergo I'm okay with people spending their money (and Valve making money) on fancy hats in TF2.
Even if your boss is a jerk, you still have control of your own life. You can find another job. You can keep your head low and keep the job you have. You can get the boss fired and perhaps yourself too in the process but feel better about being unemployed.
On the job training of course. Work for a company that does Engineering and Manufacturing... preferably something like Aerospace where they have dedicated software testing teams and rigorous design documents.
WoW subscribers... 3.5e players. Which is the larger group again? If anything, WotC would have been better off making 4e even more like WoW.
Besides, if you think 3.5e is D&D done right, why would you need a 5th edition? You already have 3.5e "stuff" and there's Pathfinder for even more stuff.
Counterpoint: Non-trivial software is never cheap. It will either cost more up front for quality or more after delivery when it doesn't work the way it's supposed to.
If what you do is a) useful/relevant and b) can be understood by someone else a year after you leave the company then it's good code and you are a good developer.
They'll just get a part timer to come in and do the extra work, or offshore it, or some such.
One of the reasons for the 40 hour work week was to create more jobs. What you describe does exactly that. Granted, we weren't exactly thinking of creating jobs for foreigners when we created this rule, but I've checked into it and it turns out they're people too, so it's all good.
At best the people with degrees are more educated than they otherwise would be. But that doesn't mean that the requirements aren't dropping just to get more people though the doors.
But even setting that issue aside, the question remains: Is the college education worth the cost? There are plenty of educational resources out there that cost far less than your average college degree.
Visualize a college that can teach one person. If no loans are available, the price will be whatever the highest price is that someone is willing to pay with cash on hand. If loans are available the price will be whatever the highest price is that someone is willing to pay with cash or borrowed money. Which of these prices is higher? Either they will be tied (if nobody wants to borrow more money than the highest cash bid) or the potentially borrowed money price will go for a higher rate (since the one borrowing the money can outbid the one paying cash). The only difference is in real life you may have 30k seats per college instead of just one. But the principle still holds that those paying borrowed money can (and often do) outbid those paying cash, thus raising the cost for everyone.
Add this to the fact that people generally more willing to spend more for less when buying on time vs. paying cash and you get tuition inflated to such prices that it is no longer possible for most people to pay cash.
Money always enters into it. Colleges want money. If stupid rich kids subsidize smart poor ones then we're all better off. What makes us worse off is when average people feel like they must spend tens of thousands of dollars of borrowed money on a degree that won't benefit them in a career. Most jobs really don't require what you learned in your degree in what they ask you to do. But they require the degree anyway just to get in the door because it indicates you have at least some rudimentary cognitive abilities and can follow instructions. The problem is this is a very expensive signaling mechanism.
To belittle a point, the money issue isn't taken off the table with loans. Rather, the stack of money is moved from the table you can see and feel to a series of future tables most people have a hard time seeing. Salesmen have known for generations that people will pay more for something than they otherwise would if the cost isn't immediately tangible to them.
but mostly for the fact that getting hired without a bachelors degree was literally impossible at the time
If fewer people went to college then fewer businesses would require a college degree. The reason they do so now is it's an easy (for them) way to screen people without violating any laws.
Education and university are not the same thing. If the kids are smart, scholarships will get them into college. If they're really smart they'll find something better to do with their lives than go to college.
I think its because for all of the accusations of being an idealist, he's got a realist streak in him too. He understands that it might not be possible to do everything at once and if you're going to err somewhere it's probably safer to go a bit slower on the military side. This being said, he is still cutting the military budget more than any other candidate in the race.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you kidding? TF2 has been one of the most popular multiplayer games since the Orange box came out. I'm glad they're still devoting resources to it. I also realize that they've got to keep making money in order to do that. Ergo I'm okay with people spending their money (and Valve making money) on fancy hats in TF2.
Even if your boss is a jerk, you still have control of your own life. You can find another job. You can keep your head low and keep the job you have. You can get the boss fired and perhaps yourself too in the process but feel better about being unemployed.
"What do you mean I can't get a McFish sandwich because there are no more fish in the ocean?"
I have faith in American ingenuity and McDonald's marketing to invent a McFish product that doesn't involve actual fish. Go America!
On the job training of course. Work for a company that does Engineering and Manufacturing... preferably something like Aerospace where they have dedicated software testing teams and rigorous design documents.
It's the difference between "contract" law and "threaten someone with a knife" law.
WoW subscribers... 3.5e players. Which is the larger group again? If anything, WotC would have been better off making 4e even more like WoW.
Besides, if you think 3.5e is D&D done right, why would you need a 5th edition? You already have 3.5e "stuff" and there's Pathfinder for even more stuff.
Encounters were quite short if you didn't search for traps. But so was your character's expected life span.
Of course they're not going to ask you directly, they're obviously looking for you to show some initiative.
Counterpoint: Non-trivial software is never cheap. It will either cost more up front for quality or more after delivery when it doesn't work the way it's supposed to.
Fair? Perfect information is impossible. Not even the CEO of Intel knew Thailand was going to flood as much as it did.
If what you do is a) useful/relevant and b) can be understood by someone else a year after you leave the company then it's good code and you are a good developer.
Al Gore.
One of the reasons for the 40 hour work week was to create more jobs. What you describe does exactly that. Granted, we weren't exactly thinking of creating jobs for foreigners when we created this rule, but I've checked into it and it turns out they're people too, so it's all good.
If you think you need a college degree to be successful then you've already failed.
At best the people with degrees are more educated than they otherwise would be. But that doesn't mean that the requirements aren't dropping just to get more people though the doors.
But even setting that issue aside, the question remains: Is the college education worth the cost? There are plenty of educational resources out there that cost far less than your average college degree.
Loans don't lower prices though.
Visualize a college that can teach one person. If no loans are available, the price will be whatever the highest price is that someone is willing to pay with cash on hand. If loans are available the price will be whatever the highest price is that someone is willing to pay with cash or borrowed money. Which of these prices is higher? Either they will be tied (if nobody wants to borrow more money than the highest cash bid) or the potentially borrowed money price will go for a higher rate (since the one borrowing the money can outbid the one paying cash). The only difference is in real life you may have 30k seats per college instead of just one. But the principle still holds that those paying borrowed money can (and often do) outbid those paying cash, thus raising the cost for everyone.
Add this to the fact that people generally more willing to spend more for less when buying on time vs. paying cash and you get tuition inflated to such prices that it is no longer possible for most people to pay cash.
Money always enters into it. Colleges want money. If stupid rich kids subsidize smart poor ones then we're all better off. What makes us worse off is when average people feel like they must spend tens of thousands of dollars of borrowed money on a degree that won't benefit them in a career. Most jobs really don't require what you learned in your degree in what they ask you to do. But they require the degree anyway just to get in the door because it indicates you have at least some rudimentary cognitive abilities and can follow instructions. The problem is this is a very expensive signaling mechanism.
To belittle a point, the money issue isn't taken off the table with loans. Rather, the stack of money is moved from the table you can see and feel to a series of future tables most people have a hard time seeing. Salesmen have known for generations that people will pay more for something than they otherwise would if the cost isn't immediately tangible to them.
Not really. There are a finite number of people smart enough to qualify for scholarships while almost anybody with a pulse can get a loan.
If fewer people went to college then fewer businesses would require a college degree. The reason they do so now is it's an easy (for them) way to screen people without violating any laws.
Or you could teach yourself programming, go to work as a technician, save up money and *then* go to college.
Everyone thinks college didn't exist before student loans but they've actually been around a long time.
Education and university are not the same thing. If the kids are smart, scholarships will get them into college. If they're really smart they'll find something better to do with their lives than go to college.
He does both.
Thanks for reading it for me!
I think its because for all of the accusations of being an idealist, he's got a realist streak in him too. He understands that it might not be possible to do everything at once and if you're going to err somewhere it's probably safer to go a bit slower on the military side. This being said, he is still cutting the military budget more than any other candidate in the race.