Thanks, you're right. There would have to be some design work done around that. Still, I think the basic experimental design is fairly solid, and one could make the claim that sufficiently loving parents wouldn't make that mistake. There would have to be a meta-experiment perhaps to gauge the likelyhood that the parent participants would make an error.
I think for any experienced person, looking at gpa vs project experience is clearly suicide. You really don't want to hire the 4.0 gpa who hasn't completed any projects in 10 years. You clearly do want to at least interview the college dropout whose work experience amazes you.
If you're hiring someone straight out of college, the challenge becomes more interesting. Obviously, many people do screen by gpa, but I think that is foolhardy. I prefer to look at the person's list of projects (hint to new college grads: list of projects on resume), and see if they've done anything that sounds at all challenging (hint to new college grads: do something challenging, and put it on your resume).
Certainly, if truly _all_ you have to differentiate two individuals is GPA, take the one with higher GPA (hint to new college grads with low gpa: better differentiate yourself on your resume on some other factor, such as interesting projects you've completed).
The problem from my perspective is that I just don't know who will perform better. It may just as well be the 2.9gpa as the 3.7gpa. The problem is that the gpa has become meaningless because I know that professor's are giving punitive grades to students who have the original thinking attributes I'd like to hire. So when I hire, I ignore gpa and focus on other attributes of the resume.
Someone who chafes with unneeded hand holding is exactly the kind of worker most companies actually want. Believe me, you don't want to be paying anything in unnecessary training or management. The more hand holding your employees need to get their jobs done, the more top heavy your organization will be forced to become.
In this job market as in any, if you're filtering by a gpa, you're missing out on many of the best employees.
Although it did sound like it, my intent was not to disparage guided learning. Certainly for some people and some situations it is a better way to learn. My purpose was only to point out that the grandparent's claim that guided learning is the only way is very false.
Wow... sounds like maybe all the cheaters wind up working together.
Somehow all the places i've picked to work have been full of honest people working hard together. One of my companies parent companies once had a major incident of theft from the company, but nothing ever at the software engineer level.
School is what you make of it. If that is your perspective, you will not take much away from the experience. School is not there to hold your hand and tell you what to think or believe. It is there to provide you with information you might not otherwise be exposed to. Schools should challenge you and provide opportunities to excel.
The problem is that schools have taken the position of enforced hand holding. If you don't go along with their guidance, they will give you bad grades/kick you out which will impact your job options. Schools should challenge you and provide opportunities to excel. It would be neat if they did that.
With respect to cheating: If somebody cheats in school, they are going to cheat in other aspects of their lives. That is a reflection on their character makeup and not on the failings of a school.
Schools should be considering why there is so much cheating, and why it isn't so apparent in the workplace post-school.
Negative. This is not the same as guided education.
Actually, with 1000 times the refresh rate, you could increase resolution by using image jitter techniques. Not that I think they're going to do that or that they meant that when they wrote the article, just that it's possible.
Just another quick note on this subject, I'm assuming you've read the universal declaration of human rights. If you haven't, you should. It's probably the best attempt to define the 'big book of morality' out there so far.
No, freedom has to be a fundamental right. In order for a slave/prisoner to exist, someone has to be the slaveowner/guard. That person must be free (or someone up the chain must be free). Thus, even though not every person is able to exercise the right, the right must exist in order for someone to be the rational free agent who can then define the fundamental rights. If no one is free (we're all ruled by robots/ god declares no free will) then you reach a devolved case where discussion of rights is moot.
Most games are multi-threaded just a little bit, but not enough for multicore to help rather than hurt. They'll certainly consider multicore in next generation titles, but most titles today aren't anything like cpu bound (they're all GPU bound).
a) It happens. Good luck keeping your kids of drugs if you don't know that.
b) That's a matter of good parenting.
As to the Nikes and Coke, I don't see how those are needed for communicating with one's peers. The case for being reachable by those who are trying to communicate with you seems clearer. You may as well suggest that a kid that age doesn't need an email address. Kid's who are going to have normal socialization patterns in this age will need both and probably other things in the future, so that they can talk to their peers about whether coke or pepsi, nike or adidas is better. Or maybe even talk about things that actually matter to them.
Sadly, reality does not make that possible for many parents. A large number of families use two incomes just to keep food on the table and the roof rented. Having a cheap cell phone for emergencies is a lot cheaper than the cost of constant monitoring.
So he can call 911 in an emergency? So he can call mom/dad to pick him up if he's out with friends who start pressuring him to use drugs? So he can be normally socialized?
Double blind study for finding out if tcopeland's parents (TPs) love him:
1) Foundational assumptions: people prefer to save the life of someone they love over someone they do not love.
2) Methods: a series of pairs of people will be introduced to TPs, and they will be asked to press a button to save one of the subjects' lives. To avoid conditioned response problems, a series of at least 10 initial pairs will be introduced not containing tcopeland. If TPs fails to press one of the buttons, both subjects will be killed.
3) Theory: when a pair containing tcopeland is introduced, TPs will press his button to save him. tcopeland will be introduced in at least 10 pairings over a course of approximately 1000 total pairings to test against the hypothesis that TPs are choosing buttons randomly.
4) Double blind controls: pairs will be selected randomly by computer, and assigned to random buttons also by computer. Rooms will be soundproofed, and viewing of the pairs by TPs will be through one way mirror. TPs will be isolated from the researchers during the experiment. Researchers performing the experiment will not know which subject is tcopeland, and tcopeland will be kidnapped off the street like all the other subjects so that he will not know that TPs are in charge of the buttons.
See, it's not that hard to design a double blind study to establish that your parents love you.
Fundamental rights are those which exist independently of governments, or your ability to exercise them. Obviously it is possible to deprive someone of any right, government assured or not. You may be punished by a government for violating someone else's rights, but you can still violate them.
Defining fundamental rights is quite difficult. Perhaps the best definition I've heard is that it is the set of rights necessary for a rational free agent to exist to define the set of fundamental rights.
Historically, governments are actually quite poor at ensuring their survival. Of all the governments that have ever been, less than 1% have survived even 500 years.
I don't have any rights to that revenue stream, that's the fundamental problem. People think they have a right to make money from certain things, even if that overrides fundamental rights of others. Clue: they don't. And their attempts to manufacture rights that conflict with natural rights will end in failure or tyranny. I'd prefer failure.
I'm not sure if you're just trolling or stupid, but if I sell you my egg, that becomes your egg, and whether or not you share your egg is your business, not mine.
Bankruptcy stops the debt now, and then life is difficult but not impossible for 8 years because it is hard to get additional loans during that period. However, while possibly painful, it is not particularly difficult to live loan free. I've lived loan free for that long.
This has to be the densest reply to anything I've ever posted on slashdot.
The point is that I have the right to share, not that I am required to share. If I choose to share my eggs with you I can. In fact, I have shared my eggs and television numerous times in the past.
Not my wife though, but some people do that, and I would not advocate taking that right away from them (except that there is some evidence that there is unavoidable psychological harm in the practice, a separate issue).
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks, you're right. There would have to be some design work done around that. Still, I think the basic experimental design is fairly solid, and one could make the claim that sufficiently loving parents wouldn't make that mistake. There would have to be a meta-experiment perhaps to gauge the likelyhood that the parent participants would make an error.
I think for any experienced person, looking at gpa vs project experience is clearly suicide. You really don't want to hire the 4.0 gpa who hasn't completed any projects in 10 years. You clearly do want to at least interview the college dropout whose work experience amazes you.
If you're hiring someone straight out of college, the challenge becomes more interesting. Obviously, many people do screen by gpa, but I think that is foolhardy. I prefer to look at the person's list of projects (hint to new college grads: list of projects on resume), and see if they've done anything that sounds at all challenging (hint to new college grads: do something challenging, and put it on your resume).
Certainly, if truly _all_ you have to differentiate two individuals is GPA, take the one with higher GPA (hint to new college grads with low gpa: better differentiate yourself on your resume on some other factor, such as interesting projects you've completed).
... and that he's still in charge.
The problem from my perspective is that I just don't know who will perform better. It may just as well be the 2.9gpa as the 3.7gpa. The problem is that the gpa has become meaningless because I know that professor's are giving punitive grades to students who have the original thinking attributes I'd like to hire. So when I hire, I ignore gpa and focus on other attributes of the resume.
Someone who chafes with unneeded hand holding is exactly the kind of worker most companies actually want. Believe me, you don't want to be paying anything in unnecessary training or management. The more hand holding your employees need to get their jobs done, the more top heavy your organization will be forced to become.
In this job market as in any, if you're filtering by a gpa, you're missing out on many of the best employees.
Although it did sound like it, my intent was not to disparage guided learning. Certainly for some people and some situations it is a better way to learn. My purpose was only to point out that the grandparent's claim that guided learning is the only way is very false.
Wow ... sounds like maybe all the cheaters wind up working together.
Somehow all the places i've picked to work have been full of honest people working hard together. One of my companies parent companies once had a major incident of theft from the company, but nothing ever at the software engineer level.
School is what you make of it. If that is your perspective, you will not take much away from the experience. School is not there to hold your hand and tell you what to think or believe. It is there to provide you with information you might not otherwise be exposed to. Schools should challenge you and provide opportunities to excel.
The problem is that schools have taken the position of enforced hand holding. If you don't go along with their guidance, they will give you bad grades/kick you out which will impact your job options. Schools should challenge you and provide opportunities to excel. It would be neat if they did that.
With respect to cheating: If somebody cheats in school, they are going to cheat in other aspects of their lives. That is a reflection on their character makeup and not on the failings of a school.
Schools should be considering why there is so much cheating, and why it isn't so apparent in the workplace post-school.
Negative. This is not the same as guided education.
Yep, it's much better.
Actually, with 1000 times the refresh rate, you could increase resolution by using image jitter techniques. Not that I think they're going to do that or that they meant that when they wrote the article, just that it's possible.
Ron, tell the consumer what he's won ... ..... ... a free death!!!!
He's won
(bing bing bing)
Yep, I'm afraid all those nerds slaving away in their parent's basements are no longer cool.
Just another quick note on this subject, I'm assuming you've read the universal declaration of human rights. If you haven't, you should. It's probably the best attempt to define the 'big book of morality' out there so far.
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
No, freedom has to be a fundamental right. In order for a slave/prisoner to exist, someone has to be the slaveowner/guard. That person must be free (or someone up the chain must be free). Thus, even though not every person is able to exercise the right, the right must exist in order for someone to be the rational free agent who can then define the fundamental rights. If no one is free (we're all ruled by robots/ god declares no free will) then you reach a devolved case where discussion of rights is moot.
Most games are multi-threaded just a little bit, but not enough for multicore to help rather than hurt. They'll certainly consider multicore in next generation titles, but most titles today aren't anything like cpu bound (they're all GPU bound).
It may surprise you to learn, slashdot is composed of more than two people.
Different people, different opinions.
a) It happens. Good luck keeping your kids of drugs if you don't know that.
b) That's a matter of good parenting.
As to the Nikes and Coke, I don't see how those are needed for communicating with one's peers. The case for being reachable by those who are trying to communicate with you seems clearer. You may as well suggest that a kid that age doesn't need an email address. Kid's who are going to have normal socialization patterns in this age will need both and probably other things in the future, so that they can talk to their peers about whether coke or pepsi, nike or adidas is better. Or maybe even talk about things that actually matter to them.
Maybe it was just a typo, the i and o keys are pretty close together on most keyboards.
Sadly, reality does not make that possible for many parents. A large number of families use two incomes just to keep food on the table and the roof rented. Having a cheap cell phone for emergencies is a lot cheaper than the cost of constant monitoring.
So he can call 911 in an emergency?
So he can call mom/dad to pick him up if he's out with friends who start pressuring him to use drugs?
So he can be normally socialized?
Double blind study for finding out if tcopeland's parents (TPs) love him:
1) Foundational assumptions: people prefer to save the life of someone they love over someone they do not love.
2) Methods: a series of pairs of people will be introduced to TPs, and they will be asked to press a button to save one of the subjects' lives. To avoid conditioned response problems, a series of at least 10 initial pairs will be introduced not containing tcopeland. If TPs fails to press one of the buttons, both subjects will be killed.
3) Theory: when a pair containing tcopeland is introduced, TPs will press his button to save him. tcopeland will be introduced in at least 10 pairings over a course of approximately 1000 total pairings to test against the hypothesis that TPs are choosing buttons randomly.
4) Double blind controls: pairs will be selected randomly by computer, and assigned to random buttons also by computer. Rooms will be soundproofed, and viewing of the pairs by TPs will be through one way mirror. TPs will be isolated from the researchers during the experiment. Researchers performing the experiment will not know which subject is tcopeland, and tcopeland will be kidnapped off the street like all the other subjects so that he will not know that TPs are in charge of the buttons.
See, it's not that hard to design a double blind study to establish that your parents love you.
Getting it past HSB, that's the challenge.
Fundamental rights are those which exist independently of governments, or your ability to exercise them. Obviously it is possible to deprive someone of any right, government assured or not. You may be punished by a government for violating someone else's rights, but you can still violate them.
Defining fundamental rights is quite difficult. Perhaps the best definition I've heard is that it is the set of rights necessary for a rational free agent to exist to define the set of fundamental rights.
Historically, governments are actually quite poor at ensuring their survival. Of all the governments that have ever been, less than 1% have survived even 500 years.
I don't have any rights to that revenue stream, that's the fundamental problem. People think they have a right to make money from certain things, even if that overrides fundamental rights of others. Clue: they don't. And their attempts to manufacture rights that conflict with natural rights will end in failure or tyranny. I'd prefer failure.
I'm not sure if you're just trolling or stupid, but if I sell you my egg, that becomes your egg, and whether or not you share your egg is your business, not mine.
Bankruptcy stops the debt now, and then life is difficult but not impossible for 8 years because it is hard to get additional loans during that period. However, while possibly painful, it is not particularly difficult to live loan free. I've lived loan free for that long.
This has to be the densest reply to anything I've ever posted on slashdot.
The point is that I have the right to share, not that I am required to share. If I choose to share my eggs with you I can. In fact, I have shared my eggs and television numerous times in the past.
Not my wife though, but some people do that, and I would not advocate taking that right away from them (except that there is some evidence that there is unavoidable psychological harm in the practice, a separate issue).