Dude do you notice the air getting clearer or dirtier? Stop making stupid as hell excuses. We are messing up the enviornment, accept it and prepare.
The hole is a mechanism? thats one theory out of many, the most likely theory is we created the hole considering it wasnt there until we started polluting.
Eco Scares? Its not about scares, pollution really exsists, you can ignore it and hope the world still exsists, or you can assume its all our fault and make SURE the world exsists
Why cant we invest in both? Increase taxes by about 2 trillion dollars
(it was cut by about 1.5 trillion)
This leaves 500 billion for a manned mission to Mars.
The terraform project would require trillions, we cant afford to terraform mars. But we can send a man there, the reason we dont is, is it worth all that money just so we can claim we were first?
The terraform project is more important, we should begin now taxing for it, so that in 10 years we will have a few trillion dollars which will be enough to begin.
It would cost hundreds of billions of dollars to go to Mars.
To Terraform Mars it would cost trillions. I think we should start doing this LONG before 2020 though.
I think 2008 we should send a Man to mars, 2015 try to terraform mars.
By 2030 Terraforming will be done, and we can build stuff on mars because the pollution and the population will increase to the point that by 2050 we will need to be on Mars.
Dude, technology is reducing the value of labor and increasing the value of information.
Support technicians? I was a support technician, they dont make shitloads of money, Think 40-60k per year (which is about average)
Network specialists will be dealing with more efficient networks as time moves on. You act like technology wont advance. The physical layer wont repair itself, but most admins (this guy wants to be an admin) just sits in front of a computer making accounts.
This kinda job, you can let a script do it, and most Linux and Unix admins do just that, the scripts and AI handles most of the work.
Oh and lets talk about the trend, first it was 1 admin per computer, than 1 admin per 10 computers, then 1 admin per 100 computers.
Eventually it will require 1 admin to watch thousands of computers, most companies will only need one admin per building and this could go down to 1-2 admins per company.
You see, admins can do alot of stuff remotely, the software becomes more fault tolerant, crashes less, fails less, scripts become more complicated, security can be managed remotely, AI can handle most of the work, hackers from the outside can be blocked via intelligent firewalling and by hiding your internal ip addies etc from the outside.
You may not stop a worm from hacking you up, but just hire a security specialist to worry about that.
Face it, theres a very limited number of sys admins who will keep their job. Its like working in the factory, at one point everyone worked there, how many people do you know who work in a factor right now?
The servers will because the software if it advances in the next 10 years wont have failures. Then again if they keep using Microsoft Windows, We'll always need sys admins.
Just like the factories became automated, so will most of these tech jobs, maybe one admin will be admin of thousands of computers.
Oh and the fuel situation, those companies will never be successful, Oil Companies wont allow it.
Why? Because these geeks will eventually have the experience, the degree, and the status.
IF you dont have a degree, Have fun competiting with the third world programmers and technicians in China, India, Pakistan, etc.
IF you didnt read the last slashdot article, Americans are being fired so these cheaper equally qualified workers from outside the country can take their job.
I recieved posts from people who said "Well to compete you have to provide better value"
The only way to provide better value is to have a better education. People in Pakistan may have more experience, more talent, and more skill but you still have to survive! You wont always be the smartest and best, you have to survive anyway, and when you compete with people who may be BETTER than you, you have to work HARDER than them to win, meaning getting your degree.
How about providing a better value? There will always be costs associated with manufacturing products at distance from use. This is as true of software as it is of cars. For cars, the extra costs is in the delivery. For software, it's in the communication of requirements (and the changing of requirements, etc.). If value = (quality / cost) then you don't necessarily need a lower cost to provide equal or greater value. I suggest reading Yourden's Rise and Resurrection of the American Programmer. It's an interesting read, and might even cheer you up.
BTW, if you can't provide a better value, why do you believe you deserve a job as a programmer? She came sliding down the alleyway like butter dripping off of a hot biscuit."
Actually, I'm not worried about this for a lot of reasons:
1) As a skilled and reasonably experienced (7 years) developer, I'm better than most (though certainly not all) of the developers from the Third World.
2) I can actually interview on-site. Making a face-to-face impression is a HUGE advantage.
3) Companies don't even like to let people telecommute if they have a choice; they like to have people in-house, under their eye.
--Dave Storrs
These are some of the opinions of people at Slashdot, it seems they all see my point. Get a degree, or be replaced by Muhammed from Pakistan, or Wong Fei Lee from China.
You dont have a choice. Its survival of the most educated not the most talented.
What happens when everyone has more than 5 years experience?
Ok lets take lawyers, how do you get to be a lawyer with experience and expertise? you cant.
What about a scientist? You cant.
Basically you need a degree just to get into the door.
Its going to get very competitive, people with degrees experience and expertise will be competiting with you, what good will your experience and expertise be then? You'll need Education to get a job.
Once you get a bachlors degree and people have masters degrees with experience and expertise, If you want to compete with the crowd and the third world who has bachlors and experience and expertise, well, time to move up to Masters degree.
You have to stay one step ahead of the pack at all times to survive.
Your talent may be your technical skills and not your people skills.
What you have to do, is focus just enough on the people skills to get hired and in the door, then use your technical skills to stay in once you get in.
Working as a team, thats something you can learn playing online RPGs and sports.
Charisma, Humor, and things like that, it cant be learned, either you are goodat it or you arent.
So the goal is to level it out, put on a good act, make yourself seem like you are good with people, wear a nice suit and tie to your interviews, be polite, and when you get the job, continue to be polite, dress nice, and respect everyone.
Do not argue with anyone whos been there longer than you (its a death wish) and just put in effort to get along with them all on a business level.
Its no diffrent than school, you cant avoid people, you can learn to tolerate them and deal with them in a professional manner so that people dont have a problem with you and use your superior techical skills to make them respect you and want to have you around.
Thats what I basically did, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt, depending on which corporation you work for, as some corporations almost demand you go to social events, others are very laid back and just want you to do your work and get along with everyone.
If he actually thinks hes going to make a career thats going to last more than 10 years as a system admin, hes going to be wrong, VERY wrong.
Eventually servers will maintain themselves, lets not forget the system admin market is not in demand and hes not going to get paid a decent wage for much longer.
What he should do is go to college, get a Good 4 year degree, maybe work as a system admin via intership, Then when he graduates from college he can continue on as a Sys Admin.
He needs to get his degree so he can adapt to the times, when the time comes, Hes going to have to get a new job, wheres he going to go 11 years from now? or 20? Does he really want to go to college at age 30? By then he'll be far behind.
Look, you have to build your nest egg as soon as possible, that is
A. If you want to retire ever.
B. If you want to have kids.
C. If you want a house, car, or anything.
He needs a degree to have a stable career, he can get a job with just a diploma, they'll hire him as a sys admin, it will be his job, but when they dont need him anymore, hes gone, jobless.
Education isnt free. Whos going to pay for giving the US the advantage we need of superior education?
Currently people in China, India, Japan and other countries get better educations than we do on the highschool level, Our colleges are good if you happen to get into an elite college, but we all know that most of us dont go to harvard, mit and yale.
So what can I, the average man do to compete with someone from China whos got a better education and whos cheaper?
How am I supposed to compete? Be Better than everyone else? How do you be better than someone with more education and equal experience?
You know damn well that doesnt work in practice, only in theory.
Dont expect the government to pay? Well what is the government there for?
Tax dollars SHOULD pay, the rich SHOULD pay for my education considering I'm the one who makes them rich in the first place.
Actually you are wrong, the top 1 percent holds about 90-95 percent of all the capital in the US.
Bill gates. Warren Buffet. Larry Ellison.
IF you combine all their money you get trillions of dollars.
Ok, so please tell me, how giving these guys tax breaks, and giving them cheaper labor could possibly help a working class citizen like myself?
Bill gates wont use the money to innovate, he'll put it in the bank with the rest of the 40 billion already there.
All of these top 1% will use the money to buy themselves a new set of cars, maybe even a new mansion.
Thats bullshit, I say tax them so a person whos living on the streets can be helped, or so we can solve the teen pregnancy situation and help girls so they dont have abortions.
The money can be used so some guy whoso already rich can buy a new mansion and brag about his money, or the money can be used to help the majority.
What I cant figure out is why anyone whos poor would want to put the majority of the money into the hands of the few instead of into the hands of the many.
So ok, lets say globalism puts money into the hands of the many, IF it does, shouldnt the many have the same rights we do? Which means they should get the same wage as us, and their talent will be the deciding factor, not their price.
I dont believe in corporate welfare, tax breaks which help them, just makes bill gates and Microsoft richer.
You'll say it creates jobs, but putting more money into the system doesnt always create jobs for US.
You say indians should ask for more? Hah! They arent in the position to ask for more money, they dont have a union, they dont have a WAY to ask for more.
I just think its wrong to exploit these people, while at the same time taking money away from us.
The Global Economy Idea just wont work, we arent ready for it and we wont be ready for it until all the other countries have a democracy, a decent economy with their own businesses to compete with ours, and a good education system.
If their countries dont have this, they'll end up being slaves. And American workers will lose their jobs to the slaves.
Its slavery all over again, Corporate slavery, but no one sees it!
Definition #1. "It destroys national economies and transfers their economic assets, including public utilities, into the ownership and control of Global Big Business and Finance. It destroys small businesses and independent producers, ultimately forcing everybody to work in the interests of monopoly capitalism. It causes unemployment, economic hardship and financial uncertainty for the people, at the same time as record profits for multi-national corporations."
Definition #2 It overrides national sovereignty, party politics, and the democratic process, and can be used to undermine federal systems within nation states like Australia.
It is called "economic rationalism", and it is as phony as they come, a false theory concocted by equating two opposite concepts: oligopoly and free market.
After thirteen years of it, Australia is in chronic economic decline, and so is every other country, including Great Britain and the USA, which adopts it as economic policy. [ See Paul Ormerod, "The Death of Economics" (1994)].
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah thats exactly why I'm going to college, I mean peopel have just be throwing the jobs my direction
Blue collar workers? Please name some blue collar workers? WE ARE blue colar workers.
60k a year is working class wage.
40k a year is working class wage.
You cant really survive on anything less than 35k a year in boston.
I think we can do it in 15 years.
Technology 15 years from now may be so much more advanced that we may have.
Unlimited energy source.
Nano Technology.
Unlimited power super computer.
With enough energy, and Nano technology, as well as using our bio technology, couldnt we speed up the process?
800 years IF our technology doesnt advance at all.
IF our technology continues to advance at this pace, it wont take 800 years. Maybe 15-30.
I never said true AI was even possible because its not
Dude do you notice the air getting clearer or dirtier? Stop making stupid as hell excuses. We are messing up the enviornment, accept it and prepare.
The hole is a mechanism? thats one theory out of many, the most likely theory is we created the hole considering it wasnt there until we started polluting.
Eco Scares? Its not about scares, pollution really exsists, you can ignore it and hope the world still exsists, or you can assume its all our fault and make SURE the world exsists
POLLUTION, We wont have air in 2020, there wont be any rainforest left, and the Ozone layer will be completely gone,
yeah thats when we will send a MAN to mars, when will we terraform? 2050? If we wait until then, it will be too late, We'll all be dead.
Why cant we invest in both? Increase taxes by about 2 trillion dollars
(it was cut by about 1.5 trillion)
This leaves 500 billion for a manned mission to Mars.
The terraform project would require trillions, we cant afford to terraform mars. But we can send a man there, the reason we dont is, is it worth all that money just so we can claim we were first?
The terraform project is more important, we should begin now taxing for it, so that in 10 years we will have a few trillion dollars which will be enough to begin.
It would cost hundreds of billions of dollars to go to Mars.
To Terraform Mars it would cost trillions. I think we should start doing this LONG before 2020 though.
I think 2008 we should send a Man to mars, 2015 try to terraform mars.
By 2030 Terraforming will be done, and we can build stuff on mars because the pollution and the population will increase to the point that by 2050 we will need to be on Mars.
First USA may not even exsist in 2022 if we dont stop terrorism.
Second by 2022, we should be building on mars, not sending the first man to mars.
I mean damn, If we are going to pollute earth shouldnt we be preparing mars.
2022? Come on, we can go to Mars 5 years from now.
2022? ITs not a technology issue, its cheap Americans who want tax cuts. My Prediction, China or Russia will go to Mars before us.
Financial aid helps you buy a house?
Loans for houses = more interest doesnt it? Hows he going to pay it back without a degree and good job?
Time? Not everyone wants to work until the day they die.
Personally, I want to work until I'm in my 40s
I suggest you research technology, we already have houses which can make you breakfast.
A systems admin depends on this software failing, their whole career depends on the failure of software.
What if it doesnt fail?
Psst, ever hear of AI?
Labor in demand? Thats why we have factories now?
Dude, technology is reducing the value of labor and increasing the value of information.
Support technicians? I was a support technician, they dont make shitloads of money, Think 40-60k per year (which is about average)
Network specialists will be dealing with more efficient networks as time moves on. You act like technology wont advance. The physical layer wont repair itself, but most admins (this guy wants to be an admin) just sits in front of a computer making accounts.
This kinda job, you can let a script do it, and most Linux and Unix admins do just that, the scripts and AI handles most of the work.
Oh and lets talk about the trend, first it was 1 admin per computer, than 1 admin per 10 computers, then 1 admin per 100 computers.
Eventually it will require 1 admin to watch thousands of computers, most companies will only need one admin per building and this could go down to 1-2 admins per company.
You see, admins can do alot of stuff remotely, the software becomes more fault tolerant, crashes less, fails less, scripts become more complicated, security can be managed remotely, AI can handle most of the work, hackers from the outside can be blocked via intelligent firewalling and by hiding your internal ip addies etc from the outside.
You may not stop a worm from hacking you up, but just hire a security specialist to worry about that.
Face it, theres a very limited number of sys admins who will keep their job. Its like working in the factory, at one point everyone worked there, how many people do you know who work in a factor right now?
The servers will because the software if it advances in the next 10 years wont have failures. Then again if they keep using Microsoft Windows, We'll always need sys admins.
Just like the factories became automated, so will most of these tech jobs, maybe one admin will be admin of thousands of computers.
Oh and the fuel situation, those companies will never be successful, Oil Companies wont allow it.
Answer:The Geeks from MIT with their degrees.
Why? Because these geeks will eventually have the experience, the degree, and the status.
IF you dont have a degree, Have fun competiting with the third world programmers and technicians in China, India, Pakistan, etc.
IF you didnt read the last slashdot article, Americans are being fired so these cheaper equally qualified workers from outside the country can take their job.
I recieved posts from people who said "Well to compete you have to provide better value"
The only way to provide better value is to have a better education. People in Pakistan may have more experience, more talent, and more skill but you still have to survive! You wont always be the smartest and best, you have to survive anyway, and when you compete with people who may be BETTER than you, you have to work HARDER than them to win, meaning getting your degree.
Lets see what slashdot thinks.
Quote from rmjiv rmjiv's profile
How about providing a better value? There will always be costs associated with manufacturing products at distance from use. This is as true of software as it is of cars. For cars, the extra costs is in the delivery. For software, it's in the communication of requirements (and the changing of requirements, etc.). If value = (quality / cost) then you don't necessarily need a lower cost to provide equal or greater value. I suggest reading Yourden's Rise and Resurrection of the American Programmer. It's an interesting read, and might even cheer you up.
BTW, if you can't provide a better value, why do you believe you deserve a job as a programmer?
She came sliding down the alleyway like butter dripping off of a hot biscuit."
Quote from Whitehawke WhiteHawke's Profile
Actually, I'm not worried about this for a lot of reasons:
1) As a skilled and reasonably experienced (7 years) developer, I'm better than most (though certainly not all) of the developers from the Third World.
2) I can actually interview on-site. Making a face-to-face impression is a HUGE advantage.
3) Companies don't even like to let people telecommute if they have a choice; they like to have people in-house, under their eye.
--Dave Storrs
These are some of the opinions of people at Slashdot, it seems they all see my point. Get a degree, or be replaced by Muhammed from Pakistan, or Wong Fei Lee from China.
You dont have a choice. Its survival of the most educated not the most talented.
Sara for how long?
Experience does matter.
What happens when everyone has more than 5 years experience?
Ok lets take lawyers, how do you get to be a lawyer with experience and expertise? you cant.
What about a scientist? You cant.
Basically you need a degree just to get into the door.
Its going to get very competitive, people with degrees experience and expertise will be competiting with you, what good will your experience and expertise be then? You'll need Education to get a job.
Once you get a bachlors degree and people have masters degrees with experience and expertise, If you want to compete with the crowd and the third world who has bachlors and experience and expertise, well, time to move up to Masters degree.
You have to stay one step ahead of the pack at all times to survive.
You cant "learn" a talent though.
Your talent may be your technical skills and not your people skills.
What you have to do, is focus just enough on the people skills to get hired and in the door, then use your technical skills to stay in once you get in.
Working as a team, thats something you can learn playing online RPGs and sports.
Charisma, Humor, and things like that, it cant be learned, either you are goodat it or you arent.
So the goal is to level it out, put on a good act, make yourself seem like you are good with people, wear a nice suit and tie to your interviews, be polite, and when you get the job, continue to be polite, dress nice, and respect everyone.
Do not argue with anyone whos been there longer than you (its a death wish) and just put in effort to get along with them all on a business level.
Its no diffrent than school, you cant avoid people, you can learn to tolerate them and deal with them in a professional manner so that people dont have a problem with you and use your superior techical skills to make them respect you and want to have you around.
Thats what I basically did, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt, depending on which corporation you work for, as some corporations almost demand you go to social events, others are very laid back and just want you to do your work and get along with everyone.
If he actually thinks hes going to make a career thats going to last more than 10 years as a system admin, hes going to be wrong, VERY wrong.
Eventually servers will maintain themselves, lets not forget the system admin market is not in demand and hes not going to get paid a decent wage for much longer.
What he should do is go to college, get a Good 4 year degree, maybe work as a system admin via intership, Then when he graduates from college he can continue on as a Sys Admin.
He needs to get his degree so he can adapt to the times, when the time comes, Hes going to have to get a new job, wheres he going to go 11 years from now? or 20? Does he really want to go to college at age 30? By then he'll be far behind.
Look, you have to build your nest egg as soon as possible, that is
A. If you want to retire ever.
B. If you want to have kids.
C. If you want a house, car, or anything.
He needs a degree to have a stable career, he can get a job with just a diploma, they'll hire him as a sys admin, it will be his job, but when they dont need him anymore, hes gone, jobless.
Education isnt free. Whos going to pay for giving the US the advantage we need of superior education?
Currently people in China, India, Japan and other countries get better educations than we do on the highschool level, Our colleges are good if you happen to get into an elite college, but we all know that most of us dont go to harvard, mit and yale.
So what can I, the average man do to compete with someone from China whos got a better education and whos cheaper?
How am I supposed to compete? Be Better than everyone else? How do you be better than someone with more education and equal experience?
You know damn well that doesnt work in practice, only in theory.
Dont expect the government to pay? Well what is the government there for?
Tax dollars SHOULD pay, the rich SHOULD pay for my education considering I'm the one who makes them rich in the first place.
I'm not wealthy. Thats why I can relate to the third world.
Ok So give all of our universities the money via TAX DOLLARS so we can provide better value.
What?! You dont want higher taxes? Better value comes at a price!
Actually you are wrong, the top 1 percent holds about 90-95 percent of all the capital in the US.
Bill gates. Warren Buffet. Larry Ellison.
IF you combine all their money you get trillions of dollars.
Ok, so please tell me, how giving these guys tax breaks, and giving them cheaper labor could possibly help a working class citizen like myself?
Bill gates wont use the money to innovate, he'll put it in the bank with the rest of the 40 billion already there.
All of these top 1% will use the money to buy themselves a new set of cars, maybe even a new mansion.
Thats bullshit, I say tax them so a person whos living on the streets can be helped, or so we can solve the teen pregnancy situation and help girls so they dont have abortions.
The money can be used so some guy whoso already rich can buy a new mansion and brag about his money, or the money can be used to help the majority.
What I cant figure out is why anyone whos poor would want to put the majority of the money into the hands of the few instead of into the hands of the many.
So ok, lets say globalism puts money into the hands of the many, IF it does, shouldnt the many have the same rights we do? Which means they should get the same wage as us, and their talent will be the deciding factor, not their price.
I dont believe in corporate welfare, tax breaks which help them, just makes bill gates and Microsoft richer.
You'll say it creates jobs, but putting more money into the system doesnt always create jobs for US.
You say indians should ask for more? Hah! They arent in the position to ask for more money, they dont have a union, they dont have a WAY to ask for more.
I just think its wrong to exploit these people, while at the same time taking money away from us.
The Global Economy Idea just wont work, we arent ready for it and we wont be ready for it until all the other countries have a democracy, a decent economy with their own businesses to compete with ours, and a good education system.
If their countries dont have this, they'll end up being slaves. And American workers will lose their jobs to the slaves.
Its slavery all over again, Corporate slavery, but no one sees it!
Would be the perfect name for the Matrix Gamecube series of games.
why would goods be cheaper? are Nike shoes cheaper because slave labor in china makes them? How about your TV?
The american made brands cost about the same and sometimes CHEAPER
makes you wonder eh where the money is going
unions are the only thinng we have to combat globalism
Definition of Globalism.
Definition #1. "It destroys national economies and transfers their economic assets, including public utilities, into the ownership and control of Global Big Business and Finance. It destroys small businesses and independent producers, ultimately forcing everybody to work in the interests of monopoly capitalism. It causes unemployment, economic hardship and financial uncertainty for the people, at the same time as record profits for multi-national corporations."
Definition #2 It overrides national sovereignty, party politics, and the democratic process, and can be used to undermine federal systems within nation states like Australia.
It is called "economic rationalism", and it is as phony as they come, a false theory concocted by equating two opposite concepts: oligopoly and free market.
After thirteen years of it, Australia is in chronic economic decline, and so is every other country, including Great Britain and the USA, which adopts it as economic policy. [ See Paul Ormerod, "The Death of Economics" (1994)].
Globalism (economic rationalism a ploy)