College prices have increased at rates many times higher than inflation at most schools. So THAT is not the reason..
There is more money available to the system so the price of the commodity provided goes up. I learned that in my college economics class decades ago. Did that theory change?
It used to be that they simply could not charge that much, because the average person simply could not afford to pay. Folks got though college on the "pay as you go" plan or arranged for *personal* loans to pay for it. Colleges customers didn't have the money so they could not charge it. So what changed?
The same thing happened for Cars... It used to be that you could by a Model-T for pretty cheap money but you paid all up front. Manufacturers found out that folks would spend LOADS more money if they paid over time on credit. Low monthly payments could fleece the customer over long times and make you a lot more in the long run. The cost of cars went up accordingly and we all (mostly) now pay over time for them. College is no different. We stupidly agree to pay for College over time and the Fed will back the loans so I can borrow all kinds of money with no collateral except on my future earnings. The College is happy to take whatever I can borrow and have raised their prices accordingly. It's business, and all about taking all the money you can borrow they can.
The problem is that getting out of school with a huge amount of debt is a serious problem. In today's world as a college graduate you are lucky to get a job dropping fries at Wendy's for minimum wage. If you are looking at $20K in debt, minimum wage isn't going to allow you to make much more than interest payments while you live near poverty. Unfortunately this is common in today's economy.
So in the end, it's the Federal program to make borrowing money for college as easy as possible that has made college so expensive. Well that and the desire to get as much money as they can get their students to borrow.
Not really. They have some improvements to the current leakage issue, but we are not quite there yet.
From my understanding (and that is admittedly somewhat limited, not being active in research on this) the state of research is that they can build working logic with graphene, but that they still require huge amounts of current and dissipate huge amounts of heat compared to the current silicon designs. The issue is the uncontrolled current leakage and a woefully low gain of a graphene transistor. I suspect that their "working logic gates" require huge amounts of real estate and can only be operated for very short periods before they get too hot.
A LONG time. Graphene is not even close to prime time yet. It leaks current like a colander leaks water and has such low gain (current or voltage take your pick) to make it nearly useless as a switch. Graphene *might* find use in broadband RF amps at lower power, but it's going to waste huge amounts of energy and you won't get much gain in the process. I'm not sure what value it will be, even in that application.
They are going to have to come up with some modifications to the graphene crystal structure to make it not leak current and leave the desirable characteristics in place before this is going to be viable in digital devices. Given the materials engineers have been going after this for decades and have not yet come up with a solutions, I'm not holding out much hope for an easy solution.
Silicon is indeed unique, in it's character and location on the Periodic Table. We will be hard pressed to come up with something that is as usable in digital electronics to replace silicon. We might be able to engineer a material that is useful and graphene does have promising aspects. but it's a long way from "shows promise" to "you can buy it".
And they are apparently trying to ignore it until it goes away.
Um, Comcast, you messed up here and I suggest you "do the right thing" and admit it But I don't expect them to own up to the mistake anytime soon.
That leaves the question, what should the offended party do? Go to the public? (Done) Get it posted on SlashDot? (yep) File suit for the good of the next little fish who gets caught in Comcast's copyright protection folks? (Maybe)
Germany is subsidizing renewable energy production heavily, very heavily. Their top electric producer is now struggling to maintain their business, keep their nuclear and fossil fuel plants profitable so they are threatening to close up shop and leave Germany at the mercy of renewable. Electricity essential to keep a modern economy going and "running out" is simply NOT an option. If you run low on electricity, you have to shut off stuff, because if you don't EVERYTHING will shutdown. Many renewable energy sources are NOT reliable, the sun doesn't always shine and the wind doesn't always blow and chances are one or both will go away when you need it most. (Heck, fossil fueled plants fail, albeit less often than the weather forecast.. )
While renewable energy may sound good, there are some serious problems looming for Germany if they continue down this path too quickly. Eventually, government money can run out and the subsidizing of renewable energy will stop. Then what happens if all the rest of the electric producers are out of business and the sun doesn't shine on a calm day? Down goes the electric grid. Folks are going to find that Germany is back in the horse and buggy days, only nobody kept any horses around just in case. Bringing up the electric grid in a whole country would take times measured in weeks and would surely adversely impact the German economy.
My German friends, tread carefully. Government subsidies never really work out like you think. There is always a down side...
What is the concern here? That a bunch of metal scavengers would make off with enough Plutonium to do what? Make a dirty bomb? Pretty unlikely.
I must be in the dark or something, because I just don't see this as a serious issue. Three are a whole lot of other issues in the old USSR that deal SERIOUS radiation hazards. There are multiple rusting submarine hulks and surface ships with spent fuel still on board just sitting there and their industrial energy production made a huge mess all over the place. The test range is not a big risk compared to all this.
Now if they start seeing a bunch of North Koreans showing up hauling off equipment... THEN I get worried...
But, your chances of getting into a bad situation with a previous employer is much greater if you don't do the professional thing. Sure, it may be a lost cause and you may be barely able to face another second but I would advise going out of your way to not burn any bridges. It's a *small* world and what goes around, comes around. Maybe not this time, but eventually it will.
When ever you can, do the professional thing and give the two (or more) weeks notice. It is always good to exceed expectations with employers. Go above and beyond what they expect or deserve. Always give proper notice, even when you don't want too.
I know it is tempting.. Man it would feel good to march down there and toss the resignation letter on the bosses desk and just say "So Long Sucker!" However, remember that this guy could be talking about you to some prospective employer in the future or you may run into him some other place. You may not know when or how, but it is *possible* his opinion of you may come around to haunt you. It's a small world. I had an issue with a past employer who got miffed it's not a good thing. I don't know how many jobs that cost me before I found out. Don't just hand somebody a reason to bad mouth you if you can help it because the world is pretty small sometimes.
I was laid off once, and I left my contact information with them. "Call me if you need anything I can help you with." They did call, multiple times. I helped them when I could. They didn't deserve it, having canned me, but I got good references out of being professional and helpful. Yea I was miffed at them for laying me off, but I was professional about it. In the end they realized that they had done the wrong thing and asked me to come back. (No, I didn't take the offer..) Proving that they made a mistake was WORTH the effort. I got lots of satisfaction in turning down their offer, but I still get glowing references from them...:)
Always keep it professional. Always leave on the best terms you can. Go out of your way if only to show them how a real professional acts. It may not pay off, but you never know when it might.
Having previously quit a job without notice... I can tell you that there ARE good reasons to do it. I would just caution anybody who is considering skipping the common practice to be very hesitant to actually do it. It might seem like a good idea and provide some emotional satisfaction to boot, but the side effects can be far reaching.
In my case, I was verbally abused and threatened by my employer without cause. This was part of a pattern of behavior that included not paying me as promised and infractions of labor laws. One day I got yelled at for an hour for something I didn't do. It was bad enough that I came in that night, packed up my stuff and left my resignation, keys and company cell phone on my employer's desk. Needless to say, they where really upset with me then.
I was justified but I can tell you the ramifications of giving no notice and ticking off a past employer can be far reaching. Future employers are likely going to be checking your past employment history, calling and asking questions. Most employers are careful and don't say much, but some (like the one I had trouble with) where more than willing to dish out dirt, true or not. I'm pretty sure it cost me a few job offers before I found out and it took legal action to get them to stop.
Why do I share this? As a warning. You ALWAYS want to leave in the best way possible. Don't give them a reason to say bad things about you because it may cause you issues with future prospective employers. . Give the two weeks notice, more if you can. As you leave, do your best to keep it positive, give them your contact information and offer to be helpful even after you are gone. Don't burn the bridges unless you *really* have no other choice. Where it might be a nice feeling to just pack up and leave with a "Oh by the way, I'm not coming back. So long suckers!" The negative effects on your future job prospects are hard to know. Don't risk it.
ALWAYS give 2 weeks notice.. Unless you simply cannot stay another day for any reason...
3) Has never been treated by Redhat as anything but completely welcome.
Well, not really. Red Hat obviously cannot stop CentOs but it seems clear that Red Hat does guard their copyrighted material. They have made it clear that CentOS cannot refer to Red Hat in any part of their distribution that is not covered by GPL. CentOs *always* refers to the "up-line Linux vendor" (or some other vague reference) for a reason.
No Cent OS is tolerated by Red Hat as long as they don't step on copyrights or trademarks. They are not welcomed with open arms, but there is nothing they can do to stop Cent OS.
With all the Linux geeks running around, why does anyone pay for RedHat's service?
Because Red Hat keeps a stable of well equipped Linux Geeks on staff to answer the questions from Linux Newbies (and geeks) might ask. They also have SLA's so you have assurances that an answer will come in a known time. It is also WAY cheaper to pay Red Hat for a year's worth of support for those 10 servers than to have a 24x7x365 staff of Linux Geeks of your own.
Cheaper, plus the added benefit of having somebody else to blame when the CTO comes gunning for blood because the CEO is on his case for the server being down... There are reasons to pay Red Hat. Personally, I don't, but I can see reasons.
It doesn't prevent down time.. It prevents unemployment time.
Situation: Server down due to OS security hole - revenue being lost.... Cut to executive management office
CTO: What's up with the server!? We can't sell our widgets and the CFO is saying we are in danger of not making our numbers now. We got to fix this NOW or we are all toast!
Middle Manager: Well, sir, we've contacted our OS vendor who is looking into the problem and as soon as they have a fix, we will get it installed.
OR would you rather say...
MM: Well sir, we've been on Google all day looking for the kernel developer who inserted the security bug to no avail.
I'm guessing the first one is better.. Lets you blame somebody else and keep your job. Actual down time is not prevented, in fact it's likely longer using Red Hat over competent local admins.
Well, if that's what you want to think, I don't agree, violence still happens in places w/o guns. But it doesn't really matter.
If you really think you are correct I suggest that you just go start the process of getting the constitution changed. That pesky 2nd amendment is going to be a problem for you.
Sorry, I intended that statement to be sarcasm... I was actually poking fun at the same folks who want to bash paid for software, simply because it costs money and they think it should be free.
Of course I will now be dismissed as a poser and a hipster, but really I don't care.
Nor do I. You can do whatever you want with your money, including sending it to Apple to purchase their overpriced hardware and buggy software...:)
Seriously, if it works for you, do what you want. I don't hate Apple stuff, I just don't see a good reason to pay that much for it. But I'm a cheap oldie goldie so I end up using 10 year old revamped laptops for work and home. I don't suppose many folks would go to as much trouble, but it's worth it to me.
Ahh.. True. Intermittent use would make it much harder to find. It might take more than 5 seconds to do more than just disrupt the audio of a call, but that might be enough to get bozo to hang up. Of course, getting an usher might work too.
Like I said.. This is not new technology... It's not based on anything recently "discovered" in science nor is it a measurable step forward in features.
RF knows no boundaries, except physics. Sure, if you have direct access and can dial down the power enough to blend in with the background noise, you might be hard to find.. But you are not going to jam much either. Still, on the GPS band, you are going to have to dial back the power a LOT or risk standing out like a lighter in a hayfield on a moonless night.
I think you seriously underestimate the ability of the average person to accurately judge their ability to drive their cars. Most people don't know how bad they really are at driving, and I'm sure you are no exception. The morons will *always* be out there doing stupid things with their cars right in front of you or driving too fast behind you, speed limits or not.
This less guns leads to less death idea is not supported by the facts. In the town I live in, we are one of the 10 lowest violent crime locations in the country and we have conceal carry permits, multiple shooting ranges and folks carrying guns around all the time. Go to Chicago, where guns are illegal, and folks are dropping like flies from high speed lead poisoning just walking down the street. I live really close to Dallas too, which isn't all that more dangerous, despite Texans affinity for firearms. I likely can't prove it to you, but more guns in the right hands would be a good for saving lives.
Slashdot Mirror
Cost of living is the reason? Seriously?
College prices have increased at rates many times higher than inflation at most schools. So THAT is not the reason..
There is more money available to the system so the price of the commodity provided goes up. I learned that in my college economics class decades ago. Did that theory change?
Why? I'll tell you why. Because they CAN.
It used to be that they simply could not charge that much, because the average person simply could not afford to pay. Folks got though college on the "pay as you go" plan or arranged for *personal* loans to pay for it. Colleges customers didn't have the money so they could not charge it. So what changed?
The same thing happened for Cars... It used to be that you could by a Model-T for pretty cheap money but you paid all up front. Manufacturers found out that folks would spend LOADS more money if they paid over time on credit. Low monthly payments could fleece the customer over long times and make you a lot more in the long run. The cost of cars went up accordingly and we all (mostly) now pay over time for them. College is no different. We stupidly agree to pay for College over time and the Fed will back the loans so I can borrow all kinds of money with no collateral except on my future earnings. The College is happy to take whatever I can borrow and have raised their prices accordingly. It's business, and all about taking all the money you can borrow they can.
The problem is that getting out of school with a huge amount of debt is a serious problem. In today's world as a college graduate you are lucky to get a job dropping fries at Wendy's for minimum wage. If you are looking at $20K in debt, minimum wage isn't going to allow you to make much more than interest payments while you live near poverty. Unfortunately this is common in today's economy.
So in the end, it's the Federal program to make borrowing money for college as easy as possible that has made college so expensive. Well that and the desire to get as much money as they can get their students to borrow.
You KNOW the NSA has a server (or two) in the middle of all this.. Makes ya wonder eh?
, and alcohol is plentiful.
I think I found the problem....
Not really. They have some improvements to the current leakage issue, but we are not quite there yet.
From my understanding (and that is admittedly somewhat limited, not being active in research on this) the state of research is that they can build working logic with graphene, but that they still require huge amounts of current and dissipate huge amounts of heat compared to the current silicon designs. The issue is the uncontrolled current leakage and a woefully low gain of a graphene transistor. I suspect that their "working logic gates" require huge amounts of real estate and can only be operated for very short periods before they get too hot.
it's going to be awhile yet...
A LONG time. Graphene is not even close to prime time yet. It leaks current like a colander leaks water and has such low gain (current or voltage take your pick) to make it nearly useless as a switch. Graphene *might* find use in broadband RF amps at lower power, but it's going to waste huge amounts of energy and you won't get much gain in the process. I'm not sure what value it will be, even in that application.
They are going to have to come up with some modifications to the graphene crystal structure to make it not leak current and leave the desirable characteristics in place before this is going to be viable in digital devices. Given the materials engineers have been going after this for decades and have not yet come up with a solutions, I'm not holding out much hope for an easy solution.
Silicon is indeed unique, in it's character and location on the Periodic Table. We will be hard pressed to come up with something that is as usable in digital electronics to replace silicon. We might be able to engineer a material that is useful and graphene does have promising aspects. but it's a long way from "shows promise" to "you can buy it".
And they are apparently trying to ignore it until it goes away.
Um, Comcast, you messed up here and I suggest you "do the right thing" and admit it But I don't expect them to own up to the mistake anytime soon.
That leaves the question, what should the offended party do? Go to the public? (Done) Get it posted on SlashDot? (yep) File suit for the good of the next little fish who gets caught in Comcast's copyright protection folks? (Maybe)
Germany is subsidizing renewable energy production heavily, very heavily. Their top electric producer is now struggling to maintain their business, keep their nuclear and fossil fuel plants profitable so they are threatening to close up shop and leave Germany at the mercy of renewable. Electricity essential to keep a modern economy going and "running out" is simply NOT an option. If you run low on electricity, you have to shut off stuff, because if you don't EVERYTHING will shutdown. Many renewable energy sources are NOT reliable, the sun doesn't always shine and the wind doesn't always blow and chances are one or both will go away when you need it most. (Heck, fossil fueled plants fail, albeit less often than the weather forecast.. )
While renewable energy may sound good, there are some serious problems looming for Germany if they continue down this path too quickly. Eventually, government money can run out and the subsidizing of renewable energy will stop. Then what happens if all the rest of the electric producers are out of business and the sun doesn't shine on a calm day? Down goes the electric grid. Folks are going to find that Germany is back in the horse and buggy days, only nobody kept any horses around just in case. Bringing up the electric grid in a whole country would take times measured in weeks and would surely adversely impact the German economy.
My German friends, tread carefully. Government subsidies never really work out like you think. There is always a down side...
What is the concern here? That a bunch of metal scavengers would make off with enough Plutonium to do what? Make a dirty bomb? Pretty unlikely.
I must be in the dark or something, because I just don't see this as a serious issue. Three are a whole lot of other issues in the old USSR that deal SERIOUS radiation hazards. There are multiple rusting submarine hulks and surface ships with spent fuel still on board just sitting there and their industrial energy production made a huge mess all over the place. The test range is not a big risk compared to all this.
Now if they start seeing a bunch of North Koreans showing up hauling off equipment... THEN I get worried...
No, it actually means: "You are going to die, would you rather be executed or undergo a medical procedure?"
But, your chances of getting into a bad situation with a previous employer is much greater if you don't do the professional thing. Sure, it may be a lost cause and you may be barely able to face another second but I would advise going out of your way to not burn any bridges. It's a *small* world and what goes around, comes around. Maybe not this time, but eventually it will.
When ever you can, do the professional thing and give the two (or more) weeks notice. It is always good to exceed expectations with employers. Go above and beyond what they expect or deserve. Always give proper notice, even when you don't want too.
I know it is tempting.. Man it would feel good to march down there and toss the resignation letter on the bosses desk and just say "So Long Sucker!" However, remember that this guy could be talking about you to some prospective employer in the future or you may run into him some other place. You may not know when or how, but it is *possible* his opinion of you may come around to haunt you. It's a small world. I had an issue with a past employer who got miffed it's not a good thing. I don't know how many jobs that cost me before I found out. Don't just hand somebody a reason to bad mouth you if you can help it because the world is pretty small sometimes.
I was laid off once, and I left my contact information with them. "Call me if you need anything I can help you with." They did call, multiple times. I helped them when I could. They didn't deserve it, having canned me, but I got good references out of being professional and helpful. Yea I was miffed at them for laying me off, but I was professional about it. In the end they realized that they had done the wrong thing and asked me to come back. (No, I didn't take the offer..) Proving that they made a mistake was WORTH the effort. I got lots of satisfaction in turning down their offer, but I still get glowing references from them... :)
Always keep it professional. Always leave on the best terms you can. Go out of your way if only to show them how a real professional acts. It may not pay off, but you never know when it might.
Having previously quit a job without notice... I can tell you that there ARE good reasons to do it. I would just caution anybody who is considering skipping the common practice to be very hesitant to actually do it. It might seem like a good idea and provide some emotional satisfaction to boot, but the side effects can be far reaching.
In my case, I was verbally abused and threatened by my employer without cause. This was part of a pattern of behavior that included not paying me as promised and infractions of labor laws. One day I got yelled at for an hour for something I didn't do. It was bad enough that I came in that night, packed up my stuff and left my resignation, keys and company cell phone on my employer's desk. Needless to say, they where really upset with me then.
I was justified but I can tell you the ramifications of giving no notice and ticking off a past employer can be far reaching. Future employers are likely going to be checking your past employment history, calling and asking questions. Most employers are careful and don't say much, but some (like the one I had trouble with) where more than willing to dish out dirt, true or not. I'm pretty sure it cost me a few job offers before I found out and it took legal action to get them to stop.
Why do I share this? As a warning. You ALWAYS want to leave in the best way possible. Don't give them a reason to say bad things about you because it may cause you issues with future prospective employers. . Give the two weeks notice, more if you can. As you leave, do your best to keep it positive, give them your contact information and offer to be helpful even after you are gone. Don't burn the bridges unless you *really* have no other choice. Where it might be a nice feeling to just pack up and leave with a "Oh by the way, I'm not coming back. So long suckers!" The negative effects on your future job prospects are hard to know. Don't risk it.
ALWAYS give 2 weeks notice.. Unless you simply cannot stay another day for any reason...
3) Has never been treated by Redhat as anything but completely welcome.
Well, not really. Red Hat obviously cannot stop CentOs but it seems clear that Red Hat does guard their copyrighted material. They have made it clear that CentOS cannot refer to Red Hat in any part of their distribution that is not covered by GPL. CentOs *always* refers to the "up-line Linux vendor" (or some other vague reference) for a reason.
No Cent OS is tolerated by Red Hat as long as they don't step on copyrights or trademarks. They are not welcomed with open arms, but there is nothing they can do to stop Cent OS.
With all the Linux geeks running around, why does anyone pay for RedHat's service?
Because Red Hat keeps a stable of well equipped Linux Geeks on staff to answer the questions from Linux Newbies (and geeks) might ask. They also have SLA's so you have assurances that an answer will come in a known time. It is also WAY cheaper to pay Red Hat for a year's worth of support for those 10 servers than to have a 24x7x365 staff of Linux Geeks of your own.
Cheaper, plus the added benefit of having somebody else to blame when the CTO comes gunning for blood because the CEO is on his case for the server being down... There are reasons to pay Red Hat. Personally, I don't, but I can see reasons.
It doesn't prevent down time.. It prevents unemployment time.
Situation: Server down due to OS security hole - revenue being lost .... Cut to executive management office
CTO: What's up with the server!? We can't sell our widgets and the CFO is saying we are in danger of not making our numbers now. We got to fix this NOW or we are all toast!
Middle Manager: Well, sir, we've contacted our OS vendor who is looking into the problem and as soon as they have a fix, we will get it installed.
OR would you rather say...
MM: Well sir, we've been on Google all day looking for the kernel developer who inserted the security bug to no avail.
I'm guessing the first one is better.. Lets you blame somebody else and keep your job. Actual down time is not prevented, in fact it's likely longer using Red Hat over competent local admins.
Seek balance young grasshopper.... (And lay off the coffee..)
Shesh...
... Once they upgrade their current device...
Well, if that's what you want to think, I don't agree, violence still happens in places w/o guns. But it doesn't really matter.
If you really think you are correct I suggest that you just go start the process of getting the constitution changed. That pesky 2nd amendment is going to be a problem for you.
Sorry, I intended that statement to be sarcasm... I was actually poking fun at the same folks who want to bash paid for software, simply because it costs money and they think it should be free.
Of course I will now be dismissed as a poser and a hipster, but really I don't care.
Nor do I. You can do whatever you want with your money, including sending it to Apple to purchase their overpriced hardware and buggy software... :)
Seriously, if it works for you, do what you want. I don't hate Apple stuff, I just don't see a good reason to pay that much for it. But I'm a cheap oldie goldie so I end up using 10 year old revamped laptops for work and home. I don't suppose many folks would go to as much trouble, but it's worth it to me.
Ahh.. True. Intermittent use would make it much harder to find. It might take more than 5 seconds to do more than just disrupt the audio of a call, but that might be enough to get bozo to hang up. Of course, getting an usher might work too.
Like I said.. This is not new technology... It's not based on anything recently "discovered" in science nor is it a measurable step forward in features.
RF knows no boundaries, except physics. Sure, if you have direct access and can dial down the power enough to blend in with the background noise, you might be hard to find.. But you are not going to jam much either. Still, on the GPS band, you are going to have to dial back the power a LOT or risk standing out like a lighter in a hayfield on a moonless night.
I think you seriously underestimate the ability of the average person to accurately judge their ability to drive their cars. Most people don't know how bad they really are at driving, and I'm sure you are no exception. The morons will *always* be out there doing stupid things with their cars right in front of you or driving too fast behind you, speed limits or not.
This less guns leads to less death idea is not supported by the facts. In the town I live in, we are one of the 10 lowest violent crime locations in the country and we have conceal carry permits, multiple shooting ranges and folks carrying guns around all the time. Go to Chicago, where guns are illegal, and folks are dropping like flies from high speed lead poisoning just walking down the street. I live really close to Dallas too, which isn't all that more dangerous, despite Texans affinity for firearms. I likely can't prove it to you, but more guns in the right hands would be a good for saving lives.