Defunding education is not the "tragedy of the commons." It's the tragedy of failed policies. If your hypothesis were correct, the military would also have reduced funding because it is also a socialized endeavor.
The only other manufacturer with 14nm capacity is Intel and there's no way Intel will sell them some capacity.
Why wouldn't Intel sell some of their capacity to nVidia or AMD for their GPUs? It's not like Intel directly competes with them (yet) in the high end GPU market and high end GPUs help sell new computers with Intel CPUs. I mean if Intel needs full production to fill orders, then of course they wouldn't sell capacity. But baring that (or engineering limitations), there should be no reason for them to refuse to sell capacity.
I'd wager that people who are doing what they're interested in make more anyway because they learn how to do things their uninterested peers don't care about.
I think your boss has the right of it. I loved programming ever since I had my first taste of it in 4th grade. And I had parents that had the means and will to a) care about my education and b) buy a computer for me when I was in 5th grade. Not everyone is as lucky as I was.
If I were teaching, I'd be happy if my students were clever enough to realize the simpler solution and even happier if they already understood recursion. From a student point of view, I was always more interested if the problems we were given showed a useful application of the lesson instead of the teacher giving a not very well thought out problem and getting mad at us if we solved it a different way than the lesson instructed.
st = "" for i in range(10):
st+="#"
print(st) print("Done!")
I think this falls under the instructor trying to copy the lesson on embedded loops but not recognizing that the original lesson was based on printing one character at a time in a language other than Python (which doesn't print one character at a time by default). When the code was converted to Python, the original stipulation of only printing one character at a time was removed and with it the reason for the interior loop.
don't understand why the O(n!) code that worked fine on a ten-item list suddenly performs horribly with a twenty-item list.
don't understand why sending network data one byte at a time results in horrible performance.
don't understand that they shouldn't keep waking up the CPU over and over, and then wonder why their app is sucking down battery power like there's no tomorrow.
don't understand the basics of multithreaded programming, run everything on the main thread, and wonder why their app freezes while they are doing I/O.
None of those things is dependent on low level coding experience. Well, possibly the network data one, but even there you're more likely to screw up by trying to do something low level (like send a byte at a time by hand) than you are by just using the appropriate library functions.
I'm for unlimited work visas. I'm afraid neither of Indians who want to live and work here nor Mexicans who want to live and work here. I see both as positive for this is the land of opportunity and freedom.
The raw materials are free for the taking (generously supplied by mother nature). Getting them where you want in a form you want is the expensive part.
In some languages you can create your own types. So you can have a variable A that is type meters and B of type feet. If you try to assign A to B or vice versa without explicitly typecasting (letting the compiler know you intended to do this, which comes in handy in conversion functions), the compiler will produce an error. It's a safety mechanism. You're not forced to use this feature but if you do it can help.
You can have all the innovation you want, but innovation isn't enhanced by allowing you to confuse meters with feet or by allowing you to divide by zero. Certain thing should always be forbidden if they can be detected by the compiler and the compiler can be helped by language rules amenable to correctness. This doesn't limit innovation it just minimizes obvious (or not) flaws.
The code may be technically correct but if it is hard to read it will also be hard to update in a safe and efficient manner. If you think code never has to be updated then you haven't been working in software long.
Slashdot Mirror
I have faith that with enough lawsuits eventually one will end up in front of a judge who also got hit by malware who will be less forgiving.
Defunding education is not the "tragedy of the commons." It's the tragedy of failed policies. If your hypothesis were correct, the military would also have reduced funding because it is also a socialized endeavor.
Why wouldn't Intel sell some of their capacity to nVidia or AMD for their GPUs? It's not like Intel directly competes with them (yet) in the high end GPU market and high end GPUs help sell new computers with Intel CPUs. I mean if Intel needs full production to fill orders, then of course they wouldn't sell capacity. But baring that (or engineering limitations), there should be no reason for them to refuse to sell capacity.
I thought I'd seen this before. Here's the Slashdot story saying windows 7 would be subscription based.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
For a senior level position??? They need to update their salary reference tables.
I'd wager that people who are doing what they're interested in make more anyway because they learn how to do things their uninterested peers don't care about.
I think your boss has the right of it. I loved programming ever since I had my first taste of it in 4th grade. And I had parents that had the means and will to a) care about my education and b) buy a computer for me when I was in 5th grade. Not everyone is as lucky as I was.
http://techland.time.com/2012/...
In the 60s and 70s, home PCs were not common, the Internet was a research project and long distance phone calls were expensive.
If I were teaching, I'd be happy if my students were clever enough to realize the simpler solution and even happier if they already understood recursion. From a student point of view, I was always more interested if the problems we were given showed a useful application of the lesson instead of the teacher giving a not very well thought out problem and getting mad at us if we solved it a different way than the lesson instructed.
The code without the extra loop:
I think this falls under the instructor trying to copy the lesson on embedded loops but not recognizing that the original lesson was based on printing one character at a time in a language other than Python (which doesn't print one character at a time by default). When the code was converted to Python, the original stipulation of only printing one character at a time was removed and with it the reason for the interior loop.
Yeah, but that wasn't really his point.
One loop would suffice and be more efficient as well.
None of those things is dependent on low level coding experience. Well, possibly the network data one, but even there you're more likely to screw up by trying to do something low level (like send a byte at a time by hand) than you are by just using the appropriate library functions.
Shoes are old tech, but I can't walk on the hot pavement with bare feet without feeling pain.
But that makes my monitor harder to clean!
is his name. Not sure why the summary left it out.
Technically nativism or tribalism, although race can be a contributing factor.
I'm for unlimited work visas. I'm afraid neither of Indians who want to live and work here nor Mexicans who want to live and work here. I see both as positive for this is the land of opportunity and freedom.
The raw materials are free for the taking (generously supplied by mother nature). Getting them where you want in a form you want is the expensive part.
That's why they call it youTUBE, duh.
Have you considered taking these Java programmers and training them for more complex work?
In some languages you can create your own types. So you can have a variable A that is type meters and B of type feet. If you try to assign A to B or vice versa without explicitly typecasting (letting the compiler know you intended to do this, which comes in handy in conversion functions), the compiler will produce an error. It's a safety mechanism. You're not forced to use this feature but if you do it can help.
...to send everything it knows about me to government agents and hackers. My primary security practice is being too boring to care about.
You can have all the innovation you want, but innovation isn't enhanced by allowing you to confuse meters with feet or by allowing you to divide by zero. Certain thing should always be forbidden if they can be detected by the compiler and the compiler can be helped by language rules amenable to correctness. This doesn't limit innovation it just minimizes obvious (or not) flaws.
The code may be technically correct but if it is hard to read it will also be hard to update in a safe and efficient manner. If you think code never has to be updated then you haven't been working in software long.