This study is making the leap that rejection of the popular scientific consensus (i.e. climate change) is rejection of the scientific method. By the same token Galileo also suffered from a "motivated rejection of science" for not believing in a geocentric universe which all the top minds at the time agreed was just common sense.
I'm not siding against climate change, but I think the peer review process and having independent researchers challenge ideas is an extremely important part of advancing our knowledge. I'm not sure why this study seems to believe "science" is the process of a committee making judgments and everyone following them.
Perhaps if you get a degree in psychology then you think of "science" as a form of "understood magic" and that "wizards" (scientists) should not be meddled with:D
Speaking as someone who used to contract a lot you don't have any "personal control" over any of those factors. Instead you negotiate a competitive rate, hours that work for both sides, and working conditions, but at every point your compromising with the customer to make something work. Sure you can walk away if you don't like the terms, and the same for this guy.
Honestly I've yet to run into this environment in my 12 years of being an engineer, we're professionals, but I've met people like what you're implying. So I'd suggest:
1 - See if it's actually a problem, computer guys are stereo-typically shy around women, and they may shape up in mixed company. Conversely your new recruit may be able to handle herself just fine in that environment, and doesn't want/need help from management.
2 - If it is a problem lay down the law, make an example of the first person to cross the line and anyone that supports them. You might have some turn-over, but your better off for it in the long term getting professionals.
Fundamentally it's hard to make programming physically active, but if your peers are in great shape and it's the social norm to be involved with sports and other physical activities you can still be a software engineer and be in great shape for your career. There's plenty of people like that where I work.
That said, if you really hate sitting (or standing) behind a desk for any length of time, software engineering likely isn't going to be the best fit.
I read the article criticizing a few particular lessons, but by comparison the education in public schools can be much worse. Yes there's some amazing teachers out there that will blow Khan's Academy out of the water covering the same material, but for every great teacher there's dozens of mediocore ones and a handful of really bad ones that you probably would never want your child hanging around, much less be subjugated to.
I wonder if Secretary of Education Arne Duncan cares about that?
Sure it will still catch some people, but it's about a balance of not over-encumbering people who do follow the law. Like if we lowered the speed limit to 25 mph we'd do away with virtually all fatal traffic accidents, but we don't, because the overall time saved going faster is more worthwhile.
So how much harder this will it be for the manufacturer? How much more expensive they'll be for consumers? vs how worthwhile will the technology be at actually catching bad guys and not just sounding good on paper.
+1 since you have to take apart the gun for cleaning and maintenance this seems super easy to defeat. It would have been better if they kept this requirement under wraps somehow.
When has Google last served 30 million irrelevant search results? That joke made sense five or six years ago, but modern search engines do a very job of understanding the intent of the search, and Google will often even answer questions directly now ("how tall is president Obama" gets a direct answer for example).
I can think lots of ways that his account could have been compromised that wouldn't be Hotmail's fault. I wish there was more details on how he got hacked exactly.
Not every project is going to directly translate to something immediately profitable, but I think the work itself can easily lead to the next generation of innovation 5 years down the road. If you just focus on what's happening today and scrap everything that doesn't return a profit in a few quarters, you'll be over the hill and outdated in no time.
Like Kansas City, there's no other company in the world I'm aware of that's doing research on how people can use 1Gbps connection, but I imagine everyone agrees we'll reach a point where speeds like that are common place.
I doubt their will ever be an end to the epic expensive games, like Skyrim, but the bar will be high enough that's there just going to be fewer and fewer of them. With most game developers settling for a lower price point.
Yeah, if they can harness the effect at a macro scale, this could be an enormous advance for cooling. Instead of an elaborate setup to achieve ultra cold temperatures, you could just rig up some led's and convert all the heat energy into light.
When I was a teenager love was everything, and I totally would have done this. As an adult I'm far too sensible, which makes me sad if I think about it.
I work best alone when I'm trying to solve a problem that I'm really passionate about. Sadly a lot of times that doesn't describe what I get paid for, and in those cases having a group around me helps to stay on task. if I'm alone, I'm fighting against myself the whole time to stay focused and not work on what I think is interesting.
I can believe someone from Google stumbled across a publicly available database and used that as a listing to cold call people, but there's nothing to be gained by claiming to be Mocality's partner (likely this was just a vendor making stuff up on the fly to cover face). The amount of money involved is trivial compared to time spent on other efforts, and I suspect GKBO is more of a goodwill mission than about trying to make money.
I'm sorry Google is competing against Mocality, but Mocality can't just sit on a database and expect to make money indefinitely, it's bad for Kenyans if there isn't competition.
I don't doubt that the US military spent a lot of money trying to convince people they're the good guys, why not through video games? We're building schools, handing out food, helping communities, even soldiers giving candy to children around the destruction and fighting that's happening. Ultimately we're trying to make peace with these people, which means convincing them we're about more than invading, and that we actually want to help them out and want to establish peace.
Even with doing all the work on your own time, if they know you have downtime it will raise suspicions that you're trying to double dip (sell them something you created on their dime), and may even result in an audit of how you spend your time. I doubt whatever they're willing to pay would offset the bad vibes.
Instead just give it away, sell it as an accomplishment. It's something you can put on your resume that will make you much more valuable to other companies that might want to hire you, taking initiative and streamlining your work is gold, and will probably impress your current employer which may lead to other good things.
By the same token how do I know science isn't a farce that's just a conspiracy of academics to get money. Because if I read the studies and do the experiments I can confirm the results. Likewise the "how do you know the Bible isn't written by crazy people" argument sounds good if you don't consider it's contents, history, and evidence.
But I do agree that science should be science, and not interfered with by external interests, if you claim truth is on your side you shouldn't fear or have to meddle with objective data (for both sides).
Coming from a non-physicist - when people talk about a superposition of two particles that are quantum entangled are they just saying "we know an event happened to one of these particles we just don't know which one until we look". For example if I had two cards layed face down, and picked one at random, could I argue that the cards were "entangled" because if one was picked, the other was "instanteneously" known to be not picked, regardless of distance, and until I looked the two cards were in a "superposition" of both being picked and not picked?
If that's the case, then in quantum computing, why would someone be able to store or process an exponentially increasing amount of information through having more qubits? (since users would only see one unchanging state if the ever observed their data) Also it would seem there's any number of macroscopic ways to simulate a supercondition without the need to entangle individual photons.
The book made villains out of CEO's that used laws to get money, and it makes heroes out of CEO's who worked like crazy to achieve their goals and make money off it. In real life you have shades of grey, but buying regulations is not something a "randroid" would ever support.
When both sides start using drones, we may see a future of bloodless wars that only involve machines. I can't imagine after losing a large scale drone-battle, a country sending out it's citizens to try to tip the scales.
That's a very straightforward way of interpreting the first amendment, but since it was written, there's been a million law suits that have defined what that sentence means through precedent in other cases. Like you have freedom of speech, but can be arrested if you try to insight a riot (among other things) because that's not "protected speech" but you won't find any mention of that distinction in the bill of rights.
It's very unlikely, but still has 1 to 250,000 odds in 2036 which is more likely to happen then a lot of the daily risks people face. If there's a cost effect way to make that probability 0 let's take it, I imagine we'll get more data later on to make better decisions about it, but it's good to have a plan ready to go if it starts looking more likely. Though I doubt we'd hear about it.
The market freaked out and went into free fall just at the thought that the US might lose their AAA status, imagine how they'd feel if they knew an asteroid had a decent chance of hitting the earth and wiping out a bushel of countries along with it. The economy would be in ruins whether anything happened or not.
"Sure its not as impressive as going overseas to do some work, but it also has many headaches that the overseas visit will not."
That sound like a glowing endorsement to go overseas;)
You can always help out here in the US, and you don't need to take time off to do it. With Africa you're getting out of the country and will have a potentially life changing experience while doing good for others. Both of are good reasons to go.
Slashdot Mirror
This study is making the leap that rejection of the popular scientific consensus (i.e. climate change) is rejection of the scientific method. By the same token Galileo also suffered from a "motivated rejection of science" for not believing in a geocentric universe which all the top minds at the time agreed was just common sense.
:D
I'm not siding against climate change, but I think the peer review process and having independent researchers challenge ideas is an extremely important part of advancing our knowledge. I'm not sure why this study seems to believe "science" is the process of a committee making judgments and everyone following them.
Perhaps if you get a degree in psychology then you think of "science" as a form of "understood magic" and that "wizards" (scientists) should not be meddled with
Speaking as someone who used to contract a lot you don't have any "personal control" over any of those factors. Instead you negotiate a competitive rate, hours that work for both sides, and working conditions, but at every point your compromising with the customer to make something work. Sure you can walk away if you don't like the terms, and the same for this guy.
Honestly I've yet to run into this environment in my 12 years of being an engineer, we're professionals, but I've met people like what you're implying. So I'd suggest:
1 - See if it's actually a problem, computer guys are stereo-typically shy around women, and they may shape up in mixed company. Conversely your new recruit may be able to handle herself just fine in that environment, and doesn't want/need help from management.
2 - If it is a problem lay down the law, make an example of the first person to cross the line and anyone that supports them. You might have some turn-over, but your better off for it in the long term getting professionals.
Fundamentally it's hard to make programming physically active, but if your peers are in great shape and it's the social norm to be involved with sports and other physical activities you can still be a software engineer and be in great shape for your career. There's plenty of people like that where I work.
That said, if you really hate sitting (or standing) behind a desk for any length of time, software engineering likely isn't going to be the best fit.
I read the article criticizing a few particular lessons, but by comparison the education in public schools can be much worse. Yes there's some amazing teachers out there that will blow Khan's Academy out of the water covering the same material, but for every great teacher there's dozens of mediocore ones and a handful of really bad ones that you probably would never want your child hanging around, much less be subjugated to.
I wonder if Secretary of Education Arne Duncan cares about that?
Sure it will still catch some people, but it's about a balance of not over-encumbering people who do follow the law. Like if we lowered the speed limit to 25 mph we'd do away with virtually all fatal traffic accidents, but we don't, because the overall time saved going faster is more worthwhile.
So how much harder this will it be for the manufacturer? How much more expensive they'll be for consumers? vs how worthwhile will the technology be at actually catching bad guys and not just sounding good on paper.
+1 since you have to take apart the gun for cleaning and maintenance this seems super easy to defeat. It would have been better if they kept this requirement under wraps somehow.
When has Google last served 30 million irrelevant search results? That joke made sense five or six years ago, but modern search engines do a very job of understanding the intent of the search, and Google will often even answer questions directly now ("how tall is president Obama" gets a direct answer for example).
I can think lots of ways that his account could have been compromised that wouldn't be Hotmail's fault. I wish there was more details on how he got hacked exactly.
"pcworld" nah it couldn't be that easy, could it? ;)
Not every project is going to directly translate to something immediately profitable, but I think the work itself can easily lead to the next generation of innovation 5 years down the road. If you just focus on what's happening today and scrap everything that doesn't return a profit in a few quarters, you'll be over the hill and outdated in no time. Like Kansas City, there's no other company in the world I'm aware of that's doing research on how people can use 1Gbps connection, but I imagine everyone agrees we'll reach a point where speeds like that are common place.
I doubt their will ever be an end to the epic expensive games, like Skyrim, but the bar will be high enough that's there just going to be fewer and fewer of them. With most game developers settling for a lower price point.
Yeah, if they can harness the effect at a macro scale, this could be an enormous advance for cooling. Instead of an elaborate setup to achieve ultra cold temperatures, you could just rig up some led's and convert all the heat energy into light.
When I was a teenager love was everything, and I totally would have done this. As an adult I'm far too sensible, which makes me sad if I think about it.
I work best alone when I'm trying to solve a problem that I'm really passionate about. Sadly a lot of times that doesn't describe what I get paid for, and in those cases having a group around me helps to stay on task. if I'm alone, I'm fighting against myself the whole time to stay focused and not work on what I think is interesting.
I can believe someone from Google stumbled across a publicly available database and used that as a listing to cold call people, but there's nothing to be gained by claiming to be Mocality's partner (likely this was just a vendor making stuff up on the fly to cover face). The amount of money involved is trivial compared to time spent on other efforts, and I suspect GKBO is more of a goodwill mission than about trying to make money.
I'm sorry Google is competing against Mocality, but Mocality can't just sit on a database and expect to make money indefinitely, it's bad for Kenyans if there isn't competition.
I don't doubt that the US military spent a lot of money trying to convince people they're the good guys, why not through video games? We're building schools, handing out food, helping communities, even soldiers giving candy to children around the destruction and fighting that's happening. Ultimately we're trying to make peace with these people, which means convincing them we're about more than invading, and that we actually want to help them out and want to establish peace.
Even with doing all the work on your own time, if they know you have downtime it will raise suspicions that you're trying to double dip (sell them something you created on their dime), and may even result in an audit of how you spend your time. I doubt whatever they're willing to pay would offset the bad vibes.
Instead just give it away, sell it as an accomplishment. It's something you can put on your resume that will make you much more valuable to other companies that might want to hire you, taking initiative and streamlining your work is gold, and will probably impress your current employer which may lead to other good things.
By the same token how do I know science isn't a farce that's just a conspiracy of academics to get money. Because if I read the studies and do the experiments I can confirm the results. Likewise the "how do you know the Bible isn't written by crazy people" argument sounds good if you don't consider it's contents, history, and evidence.
But I do agree that science should be science, and not interfered with by external interests, if you claim truth is on your side you shouldn't fear or have to meddle with objective data (for both sides).
Coming from a non-physicist - when people talk about a superposition of two particles that are quantum entangled are they just saying "we know an event happened to one of these particles we just don't know which one until we look". For example if I had two cards layed face down, and picked one at random, could I argue that the cards were "entangled" because if one was picked, the other was "instanteneously" known to be not picked, regardless of distance, and until I looked the two cards were in a "superposition" of both being picked and not picked?
If that's the case, then in quantum computing, why would someone be able to store or process an exponentially increasing amount of information through having more qubits? (since users would only see one unchanging state if the ever observed their data) Also it would seem there's any number of macroscopic ways to simulate a supercondition without the need to entangle individual photons.
The book made villains out of CEO's that used laws to get money, and it makes heroes out of CEO's who worked like crazy to achieve their goals and make money off it. In real life you have shades of grey, but buying regulations is not something a "randroid" would ever support.
When both sides start using drones, we may see a future of bloodless wars that only involve machines. I can't imagine after losing a large scale drone-battle, a country sending out it's citizens to try to tip the scales.
That's a very straightforward way of interpreting the first amendment, but since it was written, there's been a million law suits that have defined what that sentence means through precedent in other cases. Like you have freedom of speech, but can be arrested if you try to insight a riot (among other things) because that's not "protected speech" but you won't find any mention of that distinction in the bill of rights.
It's very unlikely, but still has 1 to 250,000 odds in 2036 which is more likely to happen then a lot of the daily risks people face. If there's a cost effect way to make that probability 0 let's take it, I imagine we'll get more data later on to make better decisions about it, but it's good to have a plan ready to go if it starts looking more likely. Though I doubt we'd hear about it.
The market freaked out and went into free fall just at the thought that the US might lose their AAA status, imagine how they'd feel if they knew an asteroid had a decent chance of hitting the earth and wiping out a bushel of countries along with it. The economy would be in ruins whether anything happened or not.
"Sure its not as impressive as going overseas to do some work, but it also has many headaches that the overseas visit will not."
;)
That sound like a glowing endorsement to go overseas
You can always help out here in the US, and you don't need to take time off to do it. With Africa you're getting out of the country and will have a potentially life changing experience while doing good for others. Both of are good reasons to go.