If you learned Java, HTML 4/5, CSS, difference of SQL/NOSQL data storage, etc. These things are NOT going to cease in 2 years.
The problem is, that universities are often decades behind. In 2000, my computer science program required Novell Netware, COBOL, and PASCAL was common too. Sure I took some C++ and VB as electives. But how could an entire computer science curriculum be devoid of anything web related in 2000? That was just insane...
It would be like graduating today, and not even touching upon mobile, web services, or XML....huh what?
We're not talking about graduating students at the cutting edge. But they shouldn't waste 2-4 years of their lives to come out 10 years behind the 8 ball. That's ridiculous...
Okay, I completed a 2 year associate program. Graduated in 2000. The problem...
All of the good students knew everything we were learnined was mostly a waste of time. COBOL, Netware, etc.
Zero for HTML/Web/Java/Windows Server/etc...
In fact, everything of value I learned in the program came from a few elective courses I took. Namely, a one semester C++ course really gave me my fundamentals of loops, arrays, etc, etc. I took VB I & II electives. But other than that first C++ course I took, I gained far more knowledge and skills from a Sam's Teach yourself HTML in 24 hours book.
The problem, is that university education is a dinosaur. It is a big lumbering slow behemoth. The heads of the IT program were dated in their skills, so they did not want to teach anything they didn't know. Sure the head of the program knew Netware, but it was already almost extinct by that point. If there are ZERO job listings for an old technology, a school should drop teaching it.
COBOL, yes there were jobs for COBOL, if you KNEW the language. 1 or 2 semesters is not enough to become proficient. And basic college class COBOL shared very little with the COBOL that was being run out there in the real world.
The truth is, an IT program for ANY university needs to be dynamic. It needs to set some fundamental concepts and systems but devoid itself of being tied too strongly to platforms. The biggest royal pain was when I tried to transfer. Basically it was a road block, I endeavored to enter an IT program of a nearby university. But they had a different credit and requirement system. They required 4 credits in a language, and refused to accept my COBOL or VB credits. As C++ was a single semester, that was only 3 credits. The solution? I would have been required to take two more semesters of PASCAL...really?
***
The point is, education should not be about a god damn white slip of paper. It should be about education, and being prepared for a practical endeavor of life. And this is why, within 20 years, 80% of the universities and colleges in America will be gone.
Because they are utterly failing their students while encumbering them with debt that far far far exceeds the value of the service most colleges are providing. And it can only go on so long, with a $1 trillion+ of student loan debt and A students flipping burgers.
***
If I were to be developing a curriculum. I would list out what concepts are necessary for today. These concepts would be updated as the business world evolves. But the platforms and means to instruct those concepts would be much more fluid.
For example, one might want to teach loops, sorts, conditional logic, arrays, encapsulation, inheritance, etc, etc. Well most of those can be taught on a wide variety of languages. DO NOT tie your curriculum to a specific language to technology. Likewise, for networking, security, roles, access, etc. These concepts stand true whether you're using a Microsoft or Unix based system. If Petunia Global Whale of a Network displaces both of those in 10 years as the default standard. It is likely that security, roles, access privileges, etc. will remain important.
So really, a university should be evaluating what concepts need to be taught, and then separately evaluating the best platform to teach it on. For example, mobile development...hot area. 5 years ago it might have made more sense to teach concepts of mobile development on the iOS platform. Today, it would make more sense to teach it on Android. (More accessibility, one can build off of prior instruction using Java.) But that doesn't mean it will always be the case.
A university curriculum needs to be practical and forward seeking. And no, there is no excuse for not being so. Don't spout that BS that curriculums take time to develop. Computer Science is NOT math or literature, it is not an area of study that is stagnant for decades on the lower end. Rather the lower ends are often the most dynamic areas.
The issue is, that WE understand that our bandwidth cannot be guaranteed at ALL TIMES. We understand, that weather, network problems, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc. Can impede bandwidth.
As such, we allow, and accept a reasonable indemification against a 100% uptime and guaranteed speed deliveries. The problem is, that that allowance has and is being abused to justify providing a less than agreed to performance. More so, that the performance is deterministic based upon content.
In otherwords, if I go to Speedtest.net, Comcast will allow me to have 100% or MORE of my purchased 50mbps bandwidth. But....if I go to Netflix, bittorrent, or any site that may compete with their alternative business offerings. My bandwidth is reduced significantly.
And that is FRAUDULENT AND CRIMINAL and we are fully justified in being pissed off as hell.
- far exceeds your costs for the product you are delivering - is protected by government granted monopolies - is made by a company receiving millions in tax subsidies - is made by violating regulations and paying off politicians to avoid penalties - is made by making illegal non-compete deals with your rival Verizon, so you can both charge excessive rates.
Thinkprogress points to a 0.79 degree increase in temperature
"average temperatures in and around the North Atlantic rose or fell by 10C or more in the course of a decade or two—a pattern that lasted for 70,000 years."
Maybe we should stop wasting money studying CO2 and check and make sure our sun is okay. I'd hate to clean up all the CO2, only to find out we should of been building ships to get us off planet before the earth shattering ka-boom.
Because globalists want a global tax, and CO2/Carbon Tax was as damn close as they've ever managed to come. Why do you want a global tax. Because, whomever you have to pay taxes too, you are subservient too. Taxes (aka Tribute)
You do realize that glaciers have been in retreat for thousands of years...with the occasional blips of moving forward, usually due to anomolies like large volcanoes, a solar output shifts.
I can tell you in the several millenia before that, it got much warmer. Heck, the ice bridge between Asia and N. America completely melted. And the world was flooded and doomed.
I agree with point 1. Disagree with point 2. But will postulate a point 3. That we should strive for changes that reduce and eliminate pollution. Not because of some theory, but because it's the right thing to do - leave our children a clean world, and no need to have to send troops to the middle east.
Claiming a 1 degree change as having tipped the point is a tad ridiculous...
Second, I'll argue that the goal of life on earth is to evolve, adapt and die. And don't give me any of that symbiotic bs. Symbiosis is merely a temporary precursor. The true goal should be the eradication and elimination of all life - there can only be one species.
Whether that will be humans, which shall learn to photosynthesize as well as metabolism their old in the form of soylent green, I do not know. My money is on the Octopus....but hey.
Can't be held responsible if you fail to evolve.:-P
That this was clearly a "work for hire", and that the Color Run, in hiring the photographer, was clearly doing so in order to have photos they could utilize for promotional purposes (which would include Facebook).
As it is an organization, there is no point in having photos for ANY OTHER PURPOSE...than promotion & marketing. An organization doesn't spend money to have photographs for pleasure. That violates business, even non-profit businesses. Rather, to me it seems very clear that the photographer was hired for such work.
As such, the rights of those photos, should belong with the hiring agent. Otherwise, the photographer should not be paid. They should just attend the event, take their pictures and then try to sell them to Color Run.
And yes, I know some out there will exclaim, THAT'S NOT HOW THE LAW WORKS. You're right, but it's damn well how it should be. And I am fully aware of how this law works thanks to Wedding Photographers. Who want to charge you thousands for the job, and hundreds for the photos. Which to me is wrong. You set a service price, you provide the service (which is includes the photos). That should be it...
Oh, and I've photographed quite a few weddings. And when I do so, I give copies of all the decent images on disc. Along with a print out granting the couple the right to re-produce.
Slashdot Mirror
If you learned Java, HTML 4/5, CSS, difference of SQL/NOSQL data storage, etc. These things are NOT going to cease in 2 years.
The problem is, that universities are often decades behind. In 2000, my computer science program required Novell Netware, COBOL, and PASCAL was common too. Sure I took some C++ and VB as electives. But how could an entire computer science curriculum be devoid of anything web related in 2000? That was just insane...
It would be like graduating today, and not even touching upon mobile, web services, or XML....huh what?
We're not talking about graduating students at the cutting edge. But they shouldn't waste 2-4 years of their lives to come out 10 years behind the 8 ball. That's ridiculous...
Okay, I completed a 2 year associate program. Graduated in 2000. The problem...
All of the good students knew everything we were learnined was mostly a waste of time. COBOL, Netware, etc.
Zero for HTML/Web/Java/Windows Server/etc...
In fact, everything of value I learned in the program came from a few elective courses I took. Namely, a one semester C++ course really gave me my fundamentals of loops, arrays, etc, etc. I took VB I & II electives. But other than that first C++ course I took, I gained far more knowledge and skills from a Sam's Teach yourself HTML in 24 hours book.
The problem, is that university education is a dinosaur. It is a big lumbering slow behemoth. The heads of the IT program were dated in their skills, so they did not want to teach anything they didn't know. Sure the head of the program knew Netware, but it was already almost extinct by that point. If there are ZERO job listings for an old technology, a school should drop teaching it.
COBOL, yes there were jobs for COBOL, if you KNEW the language. 1 or 2 semesters is not enough to become proficient. And basic college class COBOL shared very little with the COBOL that was being run out there in the real world.
The truth is, an IT program for ANY university needs to be dynamic. It needs to set some fundamental concepts and systems but devoid itself of being tied too strongly to platforms. The biggest royal pain was when I tried to transfer. Basically it was a road block, I endeavored to enter an IT program of a nearby university. But they had a different credit and requirement system. They required 4 credits in a language, and refused to accept my COBOL or VB credits. As C++ was a single semester, that was only 3 credits. The solution? I would have been required to take two more semesters of PASCAL...really?
***
The point is, education should not be about a god damn white slip of paper. It should be about education, and being prepared for a practical endeavor of life. And this is why, within 20 years, 80% of the universities and colleges in America will be gone.
Because they are utterly failing their students while encumbering them with debt that far far far exceeds the value of the service most colleges are providing. And it can only go on so long, with a $1 trillion+ of student loan debt and A students flipping burgers.
***
If I were to be developing a curriculum. I would list out what concepts are necessary for today. These concepts would be updated as the business world evolves. But the platforms and means to instruct those concepts would be much more fluid.
For example, one might want to teach loops, sorts, conditional logic, arrays, encapsulation, inheritance, etc, etc. Well most of those can be taught on a wide variety of languages. DO NOT tie your curriculum to a specific language to technology. Likewise, for networking, security, roles, access, etc. These concepts stand true whether you're using a Microsoft or Unix based system. If Petunia Global Whale of a Network displaces both of those in 10 years as the default standard. It is likely that security, roles, access privileges, etc. will remain important.
So really, a university should be evaluating what concepts need to be taught, and then separately evaluating the best platform to teach it on. For example, mobile development...hot area. 5 years ago it might have made more sense to teach concepts of mobile development on the iOS platform. Today, it would make more sense to teach it on Android. (More accessibility, one can build off of prior instruction using Java.) But that doesn't mean it will always be the case.
A university curriculum needs to be practical and forward seeking. And no, there is no excuse for not being so. Don't spout that BS that curriculums take time to develop. Computer Science is NOT math or literature, it is not an area of study that is stagnant for decades on the lower end. Rather the lower ends are often the most dynamic areas.
Today, a college curriculum
Is there a region this spectrum is not digital? We could likely fit a thousand digital stations in that same airspace.
The issue is, that WE understand that our bandwidth cannot be guaranteed at ALL TIMES. We understand, that weather, network problems, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc. Can impede bandwidth.
As such, we allow, and accept a reasonable indemification against a 100% uptime and guaranteed speed deliveries. The problem is, that that allowance has and is being abused to justify providing a less than agreed to performance. More so, that the performance is deterministic based upon content.
In otherwords, if I go to Speedtest.net, Comcast will allow me to have 100% or MORE of my purchased 50mbps bandwidth. But....if I go to Netflix, bittorrent, or any site that may compete with their alternative business offerings. My bandwidth is reduced significantly.
And that is FRAUDULENT AND CRIMINAL and we are fully justified in being pissed off as hell.
My problem with profit is when the profit...
- far exceeds your costs for the product you are delivering
- is protected by government granted monopolies
- is made by a company receiving millions in tax subsidies
- is made by violating regulations and paying off politicians to avoid penalties
- is made by making illegal non-compete deals with your rival Verizon, so you can both charge excessive rates.
That's right....and Comcast sure as !@#$% ain't putting in a best effort.
Second, if I can't even get enough for a 6mbps feed on my 50mbps service, I'm barely getting over 10% of my rate. That's not best effort.
So excuse me if I tell any Comcast defenders...
FUCK YOU
FUCK YOU
FUCK YOU
FUCK YOU
I pay Comcast for 50mbps....
I have paid for a 50mbps bridge, and cannot carry a 6mbps load I need to move Netflix....
So excuse me......Yes, Comcast are the issue.
The costs get passed anyways. Regulation can a) limit the amount charged, and b) ensure that when those costs get passed - so do some bloody benefits.
But if they don't deliver the speed. My bill should be dropped down to the corresponding lower rate.
Does this mean I get to take a baseball bat to Comcast's CEO's head if I am still unable to stream Netflix in 3D?
Cause I'm !@#$% sick of this...
Thinkprogress points to a 0.79 degree increase in temperature
"average temperatures in and around the North Atlantic rose or fell by 10C or more in the course of a decade or two—a pattern that lasted for 70,000 years."
http://news.sciencemag.org/ear...
Just saying, that makes um the thinkprogress 0.79 degrees seem like nada.
Maybe we should stop wasting money studying CO2 and check and make sure our sun is okay. I'd hate to clean up all the CO2, only to find out we should of been building ships to get us off planet before the earth shattering ka-boom.
Grant $$$
Lots of it...
Why?
Because globalists want a global tax, and CO2/Carbon Tax was as damn close as they've ever managed to come. Why do you want a global tax. Because, whomever you have to pay taxes too, you are subservient too. Taxes (aka Tribute)
And the prior year where China, India and Europe had some several hundre year old records broken.
You do realize that glaciers have been in retreat for thousands of years...with the occasional blips of moving forward, usually due to anomolies like large volcanoes, a solar output shifts.
I can tell you in the several millenia before that, it got much warmer. Heck, the ice bridge between Asia and N. America completely melted. And the world was flooded and doomed.
I agree with point 1. Disagree with point 2. But will postulate a point 3. That we should strive for changes that reduce and eliminate pollution. Not because of some theory, but because it's the right thing to do - leave our children a clean world, and no need to have to send troops to the middle east.
Probably not very much...Sure, we could lose some land over the next several thousand years. But heck, we'd gain the entire continent of Antarctica.
Claiming a 1 degree change as having tipped the point is a tad ridiculous...
Second, I'll argue that the goal of life on earth is to evolve, adapt and die. And don't give me any of that symbiotic bs. Symbiosis is merely a temporary precursor. The true goal should be the eradication and elimination of all life - there can only be one species.
Whether that will be humans, which shall learn to photosynthesize as well as metabolism their old in the form of soylent green, I do not know. My money is on the Octopus....but hey.
Can't be held responsible if you fail to evolve. :-P
Really, cause it's like we moved 1 degree, when the temperature range of the earth's history is like 30-40 degrees.
Just saying...
NEGATE THE ABOVE.
I mis-read, and thought the Color Run had "hired" the photographer.
That this was clearly a "work for hire", and that the Color Run, in hiring the photographer, was clearly doing so in order to have photos they could utilize for promotional purposes (which would include Facebook).
As it is an organization, there is no point in having photos for ANY OTHER PURPOSE...than promotion & marketing. An organization doesn't spend money to have photographs for pleasure. That violates business, even non-profit businesses. Rather, to me it seems very clear that the photographer was hired for such work.
As such, the rights of those photos, should belong with the hiring agent. Otherwise, the photographer should not be paid. They should just attend the event, take their pictures and then try to sell them to Color Run.
And yes, I know some out there will exclaim, THAT'S NOT HOW THE LAW WORKS. You're right, but it's damn well how it should be. And I am fully aware of how this law works thanks to Wedding Photographers. Who want to charge you thousands for the job, and hundreds for the photos. Which to me is wrong. You set a service price, you provide the service (which is includes the photos). That should be it...
Oh, and I've photographed quite a few weddings. And when I do so, I give copies of all the decent images on disc. Along with a print out granting the couple the right to re-produce.
And you do realize that the Model S and Model X are BOTH hatchbacks!!!
MOD THIS GUY UP, NOT DOWN...
Or....
S = Standard
X = Crossover (X being a common abbreviation for that vehicle class)
E = Everyone
The next vehicle after that I believe will be the
T = Truck