Being a student in both a CS and a business environment, I totally see where you're coming from. A lot of the software used in the business courses here are Windows specific, and have no equivalents in linux. Training people on Windows software makes them accustomed to Windows, thus when they go into the corporate world either to work for an employer or to start their own businesses, their apps will most likely be Windows based. I see this happening in almost all the departments at my school: finance, management, HR, statistics, real estate, marketing, etc. all rely on Windows apps for training. All those usability issues are inherent in any system - I've seen MBAs being taught how My Explorer works, and the different between.exe and.bat. If that kind of attention can be directed towards.rpm and other aspects of linux, the usability turns out to be the same.
However, I don't see many businesses who have been operating for many years making a switch. You bring up the valid point that a lot of in-house software is written for Windows and can't be cheaply replicated on linux.
The hope is in future businesses and the infrastructure designers of the future. Having some linux experience, I can help introduce my friends in the business school to linux and the whole open source philosophy. A lot of geeks bundle themselves into this happy bubble world, and forget to reach out to those who have never heard of open source or the concept of free software. A lot of my business peers are interested in learning and using linux, but they are afraid to ask because they don't want to come off sounding stupid, nor do they want to deal with the egos that some open source advocates and techies harbor. Some patience and coherence can go a long way in showing the newbie all the benefits of linux. Even if they don't fall head over heels for it, they can at least keep it in mind as an option. I think if this generation's entrepreneurs embrace and accept and are informed about linux and other open source options, decisions later on in their corporate lives can be made in favor of linux use. Of course, this will only work if programmers can create apps for linux that businesses need, but as the community grows, hopefully this will happen.
Then again, many people can't do the same with Windows (installing programs and configuring it to their liking).
Funny story - the guy I work for didn't know how to install Adobe Acrobat Reader, even after clicking on the link and seeing the instructions. He actually called me and asked if he was doing it right. I can't imagine how he'd deal with a tar.gz file.
I work on the side for a professor who happens to be a partner in a real estate firm. His only reason to have a PC at home: so he can check e-mail and read word/excel documents.
The same goes for most of his employees. They're mostly 20-30 somethings who are heavily interested in real estate and finance, and could give a shit about computer games, the latest graphic cards, the coolest new gadgets, etc. Most of them don't have kids yet, and they just want to be able to write up a proposal at home or surf the web. So why are they all running Windows?
Because that's what the firm uses in its offices. They have had no exposure to other options. All they have experienced in computers is the Windows machine at their cubicle, so when they go shopping for a computer, they want what's familiar to them: a Windows machine.
If my professor and his firm switched over to linux, I'm pretty confidant his employees will want linux machines at home too. In non-tech industries, this trend seems to hold pretty steadfast - the real estate guys could care less about which OS they use, as long as it works for them both at work and at home.
I was introduced to linux by a few co-workers. They taught and convinced me, and now I'll do the same to my friends.
These articles make great references when you're trying to teach people about linux. My co-workers often pointed me to a study or news tidbit to prove a point or garner support. Even if I were never to read/. myself, at least those trying to inform me could reference me over to a few choice articles.
It spreads, slowly but surely.
And I'm in the business school. I can make it happen.
Actually, the job I have now is with research at CIS under a prof. It's very interesting work and I'm learning a lot, but that doesn't hide the fact that it still doesn't cover my rent (which is very modest - under $300 a month). University research is great, but it doesn't always feed you. And as stated before, I didn't get my job through my resume, I got it by accidentally being in the right place at the right time - through a chance meeting and a misdirected e-mail. I was hired because the research is government funded and requires a certain quota of females/minorities on the staff, therefore they managed to squeeze me in on a team that was already full.
Almost every company that is worth interning for has recruiters.
I am currently an undergrad at UPenn engineering. I was also in the internship market this last semester (as I have been in the past two years). Overall, no matter what job market there has been, finding an iternship has been damn hard for me.
Find a job you're interested in
I'm also interested in practically anything related to computer science. I sent out about 30 resumes in the past two months alone, all to companies with openings that I would love to be in. Not one response. The job I have now was due to an accidental meeting, and barely pays enough for my rent, much less food. And I'm living in pennsylvania. Not exactly the height of luxury here.
Know what you're talking about
This is good advice, provided you get an interview in the first place. I didn't even get that far, so I had no chance to prove to anybody that I knew my stuff. You'd be surprised at how many recruiters that you call simply won't let you have even a first chance.
Have a good resume
Unfortunately, my resume doesn't have CMU stamped across the top. I don't think you realize how much that may do for you when an employer puts your resume alongside mine. I have been very active in school, and have quite a bit of fine arts experience alongside my cse classes. Community service and club activities and independent projects have done jack shit for me in terms of employment. I would never give up being an editor or a research advisor or any of the things I do that are unpaid. But those activities don't mean anything to an employer, at least in my experience. It's a Catch 22 - I haven't had any decent work experience in the field, so people don't want to hire me. But since people won't hire me due to my lack of experience, I will never get experience out in the field.
Go for it
You assume we all have connections and friends who can get us "in." I have two friends working at M$ right now, and there's nothing they can do about getting me hired, either at M$ or at any other software company. I hate to burst your bubble, but friends != job in many cases, despite what may have happened to you. And sometimes putting your resume into the "sea of crap" lands you a good job. It worked for my friend at Unisys, it just hasn't worked for me.
Bleh, that's all I can say. You have been very lucky, and I do not doubt that you also are very gifted and intelligent. Unfortunately, your positive experience with the job market does not mean there it's easy for the rest of us.
Even if I did live near a teaching hospital with a good library, the web often precedes paper publications.
Actually, since I'm not an avid reader of the major medicine journals, could i get a link on that or something? I know that the Wall Street Journal's online articles often experience a lag time in comparison to the publication, and I know the site for the Detroit Free Press doesn't update its articles before the paper goes out. I was not aware that the medical field was different.
You are confusing two issues here. It is one thing to actively spend money on things the community most values (Scientific American v Hustler) and quite another to actively spend money on censorship (filters aren't free).
Ah. but what if by subscribing to Scientific American, you automatically get an issue of Hustler bundled with it, stapled and intwined within the pages? Obviously, based on what the community values, you would rip out the pages of Hustler and leave only the SA to be put on display. And the library would be willing to pay somebody to sort through the Scientific Americans to make sure there aren't any Hustler pages still attached. I think that may better illustrate what I was trying to say. By having a connection to the internet, you not only get the valued info, but also the not quite so valuable info. You didn't ask for the porn to be there, but it is. Now, I know I'm stretching out this analogy, but I'm thinking from the point of view of my parents, who are frighteningly supportive of the filter idea. To them, it is a value to have the filter, just as it might be a value to have Scientific American as a magazine to read.
1) breast cancer is not entertaining. but giving somebody the ability to view breast cancer articles on the web, means very probably, porn sites can also be viewed. And porn is entertainment. I want my kids to be able to research breast cancer. But i don't want them looking at porn. The computer at the library is a gateway to both. And unless I am standing over my kid's shoulder every time he's at the computer (which I'm sure he'll appreciate), I can't be sure if he's really researching, or looking at porn. And believe me, even the best behaved children have snuck a peak at porn. Kids are rebels; you can't change that.
2) Note, my statement was that the computers in the library were not for entertainment. I agree that the library itself is a large source of entertainment (although how that explains the chessy romantic novel section, i can't tell you). But the computers there are not necessarily for that entertainment purpose. There is a time limit at my library for computer use, since we can only afford so many computers, and everybody wants to use them. Basically, you go in, you find what you need, check your hotmail account, print it out, and you're gone. If anybody at my library gets caught trolling a newsgroup or looking at something for entertainment rather than research, the angry looks follow you out and jump you at the car. I know, I've been there. This is not the case in all libraries, I'm sure. But I tend to see computers in libraries more as services rather than nodes of entertainment. Maybe it's just because I'm accustomed to my computer at home being a source of entertainment, so I regard the machines in the library as mere research resources, or e-mail machines. But whatever the case may be, the limited number of computers at my library aren't there for personal entertainment.
It's not about just seeing a *gasp* bare breast. Hell, if my kid wanted to see bare breasts, he/she could turn on MTV or HBO at a best friend's house and get plenty of breasts there (and more, in fact). You don't have to go to the library for that.
There's really no need for the public library to be a place where one can go to look at breasts. It's more about not allowing access to sites that are using the bare breasts out of a context in which a bare breast is acceptable. Breast cancer research, anatomy studies, these things are not porn. But allowing these things to be viewed on a public computer in the library, also can allow the pornographic stuff to be viewed. Therein lies the dilema. We want to keep the useful stuff, but the not-so-useful, in fact, sometimes downright distasteful ugly stuff, we want restricted. So what then? Well, then, it all depends upon the logistics of the filter. Who's the one to judge what exactly is "Unacceptable censorship of material adults (and in many cases even children) have the right to access"? Who draws the line at what your 6 yr old kid should be allowed to look at, and what he/she shouldn't?
Apparently, the government thinks it should be the one to draw the line. And I don't agree with that. I think there is need for a filter, but careful consideration needs to be put into that filter. And it seems like the consideration is simply not being put in.
Also, bad parenting does not mean your kids go look at porn. And kids who look at porn weren't necessarily raised a right or wrong way. It is difficult to be involved in your childrens' lives, when both you and your spouse work 9-7 jobs so you can pay for your childrens' clothes, food, and let them have a roof over their heads. They have friends that want to hang out with, they have activities they want to do that doesn't include mommy and daddy. The filter is more of a peace of mind for parents. Your kid goes to the library for 2 hours. You would feel better knowing that they won't be looking at porn sites in those 2 hours. I doubt the way a bare breast is presented in Cancer And You is anything like the way a bare breast is presented in Hot Naked Teen Sluts Click Here Now! If my parents had a choice, they would filter the public libraries too. And it's not because they are uninvolved, or they feel an ineffectual technology can compensate for parenting. It's because otherwise, they themselves have no direct control over the library's materials. At least with the filter, they know something is being done. And parents always want to meddle with the environment their kids grow up in.
I only skimmed the articles mentioned, but IMHO, there wasn't much being said on the details for the filtering. A lot depends very much the nature of the filter to be used. There wasn't much info on exactly what guidelines they plan to filter on, and which filter they wanted to use. Something the government's going to cook up? Something the librarians will determine? Something compromised in-between? I think the distinction between what is pornographic and what isn't is different for different groups. And the library has for years dealt with issues of censorship. I mean, libraries already filter out porn magazines and there are certainly no porn films in the AV section (although I only have my public libary to base these observations on). In a sense, there has been some slight filtering in the libraries already. The question is, how to make that leap from porn magazines to porn sites, and what might also be unfairly censored along the way. I think it's pretty much agreed that your 6 year old kid shouldn't be looking at porn. And parents have the right to expect that a city-funded public place will not expose their child to porn. The question is, how exactly does one create a methodology to tell a hardcore porn site from a medical anatomy chart on the web?
I'm not saying I know the right answer - I know how I would go about dealing with that distinction, but clearly it's a different process for everyone. I find I can agree with a filter only if that filter takes into account all these different views on what is porn and what is valid research material. And only if that filter is based not on a single group's input, but the input of many organizations and libraries. Though that's probably too much to hope for.
What if I'm too poor, too old, too backwards to own a computer (maybe I just like to read paperbacks when I'm at home), but my wife comes down with breast cancer. So, being the caring guy that I am, I treck down to the library and want to do some research so we can ask good questions of the oncologist during the course of treatment.
But why can't you do such research the "old-fashioned" way - with BOOKS? Yes, the library is there to provide services to the public. But those services don't include allowing minors to view pornographic material. I don't know about your library, but my library doesn't carry porn magazines. When you go through the magazines in my public library, you don't see "Hustler" up there with "Home and Garden" or "Pussy" on the same shelf as "Scientific American". There has already been some filtering in the sense that those types of material are simply not in the library's collection to begin with. They have been filtered out.
And you don't need the web to look up acticles on breast cancer or find a book that will allow you to read up on appropiate questions. If that material happens to be filtered out on the web, it is merely a means to justify the ends. And many libraries (mine included) charge you the same amount for printing as they do for the copy machine. So you're just the same financially, whether you photocopy info from a book or print it off the web.
I can see how the web is a helpful research tool, and why it is becoming more and more important to students. But the idea of having computers in the library is not for personal entertainment. The computers in libraries are for those who want to honestly do some research, and for those who feel they cannot go through the traditional route of research through books, magazines, film, etc. The filters are there to catch some of the nastier things out there on the net. Yes, some things not really considered "porn" will be filtered out as well. But if you have a legimate topic (breast cancer research), you can still find legitimate, relevant, current information in books and magazines. The web is not the end-all-be-all of resources in the library. And it's not the only form of filtering that goes on at a public library.
Agreed! (now for my plug....) In the CSE program I'm in, we are required to take extensive math classes. REQUIRED. At least 3 semesters of proof-based classes, then a very difficult math-based algorithms efficiency class. And the results are dramatic. If you can logic your way through a complicated proof correctly, you can logic your way through any implementation thrown at you. Or at least, you have been trained to logic your way through.
I have to agree that at a High School level, it's very difficult to find good computer science teachers. Most good programmers are not equally good teachers, especially to an age group as difficult to teach as high schoolers.
Personally, I'm at a university taking CS courses because frankly, I'm not motivated enough to learn anything without the pressure of a gpa on my back. I'm a slacker by nature, so forcing myself to attend an Ivy League has really made me get off my ass and learn. I'm also a audio/visual learner. I learn by listening, and by associating what i see (lecture) with what I do (homework). I don't believe that getting a CS degree necessarily makes me a better progammer than somebody without a degree. But I do believe that I'll gain skills going through the university life that those who do not go to college miss out on. And I have had some EXCELLENT professors in the CS department. Well, two, to be exact. And it was worth the ridiculous tuition I pay to have the privelege of being taught by those two professors.
As for good CS books - CS is an art form. You can't really learn it from a book. You can pick up a book on drawing, you can read all you want about techniques and materials, but in the end, you need to actually sit down and DO it. And no book will ever really be "good" at teaching programming, because programming is a process. Books will never measure up to simply trying out something to see if it works. There are good books out there to be used as references, and good books on the structure of languages, algorithms, and data types, but I don't think it's possible to write a book that teaches you how to program.
I don't know about your high school, but I stopped being spoon fed after middle school. HOW is not something you teach in a CS class. In a biology class, you are teach how a cell divides; in chem you are taught how a reaction takes place. But teaching you how to implement a linked list takes out all the application. So you've been given the code for a linked list. What did you learn by being handed that code? It's the process of doing the implementation yourself, of doing the coding yourself and figuring out what works and what doesn't, that trains you to be a programmer.
CS classes at my high school were not about teaching how, they were about teaching a way of thinking to get to how. You are given the tools - the definition of a linked list, and the syntax/logic of the language. The learning part comes from you putting the two together.
I've taken a High School CS course for AP and I'm not sure how I came out of it not hateing programing. For instance, when it came time to learn about linked lists, the book talked about what a linked list was. Then, it talked about what a linked list was. Then, it talked about what a linked list was. It never really said how to code the blasted thing. Not surprisingly, everyone failed the linked list test.
I have to agree with whoever said they would also have failed in real life. In real life, you would've been asked to implement the linked list without even knowing what the hell the specifications of it were. Do you think at any software development firm, they tell you how to code the thing? If they already knew how, they wouldn't be hiring somebody to do it for them.
Also, Microsoft software does not suck for a large portion of its users. For instance, my mid-50's parents. All they care about is being able to type up a letter in Word evey once in a while, print out an e-mail from Outlook, or buy a plane ticket online viewed in IE. Windows does all of that perfectly fine. They don't care about cool features, optimizations, or having a robust OS. If the computer crashes, they just reboot. They aren't losing ultra-important data, nor do they need to have their computer on 24/7. They want a simple user interface, icons to click, and the sense that they got something done. They don't think any of it "sucks" at all. And they certainly don't want to deal with an Linux install or anything other than what has already been simplied and laid out for them. Microsoft software only sucks to the people who can analyze it and for people who have run into problems with it. For my parents, Windows and Office are truly useful.
Also, you should note that AP classes do NOT cover everything in a college curriculum. Depending on the university, you miss out on a LOT by taking the AP credit and not re-taking the class at the unviersity level. Of course, this does depend upon the school. The type of CS classes you take in college depend vastly on where you go. And believe me, there are some schools that will hit you with things your AP CS teacher didn't even dream of touching.
Re:A crappy movie thinly veiled by Open Source
on
Antitrust
·
· Score: 1
And next is female geeks who just ooze sexuality.. bahh..I been looking for gorgeous female geeks all through my life.
I beg to differ. You just need to look in the right places, my friend:) Bitterness is a turn off. Most of the female geeks I know are not only hot, but intelligent - twice the fun in one. Being a female programmer, I can attest to the fact that my peers and I can hold our own, both technically and physically.
Lastly but most important, society and babes in particular looks upon geeks and the tech community with disdain...
Only because there are often reasons for that disdain. Your mentality that nobody else but a fellow "geek" can comprehend your mind is a prime example. You won't get dates but automatically dismissing the possibility that a person can understand you. I personally find men of a technical nature very, very appealing, but only if they are willing to share their knowledge and are willing to learn from me as well. Perhaps it's not your geekiness that is preventing you from meeting babes, it's your attitude.
As for the movie - I haven't seen it yet, but am looking forward to seeing even a half-assed attempt at getting the open source movement out into the general public. Any publicity is good publicity, and if my non-tech friends have a greater appreciation for what I do after seeing it with me, then what more can I ask for?!
You obviously have not seen any other traditional hong kong martial arts fightng movies. The action sequences in CTHD were artfuly done, made into a deadly dance, made even more believable by the skill and athletic grace of the actors. The "flying," which elicited so much "nervous laughter" is supposed to signify the power and control of old fashioned martial artists. Chinese folk tales speak of powerful masters in ancient times who had the will of mind to "fly", who had enough control over their chi to manipulate mind and body, as well as their environment. It is no more stupid than stuff that happens in european fairy tales or fairy tales of any other origin. The fight scenes seemed "stupid" to you because you do not know any other way to categorize something you are unfamilar with.
As for the dialogue - I am a native mandarin speaker, and if you watched the english dub, I can vouch that not everything was perfectly accurately translated. This is to be expected from any film translation into a foriegn language. In mandarin, the dialogue made perfect dramatic sense, and had bearing on moving the plot. Perhaps hearing the movie in its native language would make the plot more explicit. I think seeing it in subtitles takes a lot out of the emotion of the acting and the superb way each character was developed.
If you can not think of a worse movie, then I suggest you go out and see every other movie that has been released this year, even in recent months (The Grinch, Dude Where's My Car, D&D, anything with a Friends actor in it).
Slashdot Mirror
Being a student in both a CS and a business environment, I totally see where you're coming from. A lot of the software used in the business courses here are Windows specific, and have no equivalents in linux. Training people on Windows software makes them accustomed to Windows, thus when they go into the corporate world either to work for an employer or to start their own businesses, their apps will most likely be Windows based. I see this happening in almost all the departments at my school: finance, management, HR, statistics, real estate, marketing, etc. all rely on Windows apps for training. All those usability issues are inherent in any system - I've seen MBAs being taught how My Explorer works, and the different between .exe and .bat. If that kind of attention can be directed towards .rpm and other aspects of linux, the usability turns out to be the same.
However, I don't see many businesses who have been operating for many years making a switch. You bring up the valid point that a lot of in-house software is written for Windows and can't be cheaply replicated on linux.
The hope is in future businesses and the infrastructure designers of the future. Having some linux experience, I can help introduce my friends in the business school to linux and the whole open source philosophy. A lot of geeks bundle themselves into this happy bubble world, and forget to reach out to those who have never heard of open source or the concept of free software. A lot of my business peers are interested in learning and using linux, but they are afraid to ask because they don't want to come off sounding stupid, nor do they want to deal with the egos that some open source advocates and techies harbor. Some patience and coherence can go a long way in showing the newbie all the benefits of linux. Even if they don't fall head over heels for it, they can at least keep it in mind as an option. I think if this generation's entrepreneurs embrace and accept and are informed about linux and other open source options, decisions later on in their corporate lives can be made in favor of linux use. Of course, this will only work if programmers can create apps for linux that businesses need, but as the community grows, hopefully this will happen.
Then again, many people can't do the same with Windows (installing programs and configuring it to their liking).
Funny story - the guy I work for didn't know how to install Adobe Acrobat Reader, even after clicking on the link and seeing the instructions. He actually called me and asked if he was doing it right. I can't imagine how he'd deal with a tar.gz file.
I work on the side for a professor who happens to be a partner in a real estate firm. His only reason to have a PC at home: so he can check e-mail and read word/excel documents.
The same goes for most of his employees. They're mostly 20-30 somethings who are heavily interested in real estate and finance, and could give a shit about computer games, the latest graphic cards, the coolest new gadgets, etc. Most of them don't have kids yet, and they just want to be able to write up a proposal at home or surf the web. So why are they all running Windows?
Because that's what the firm uses in its offices. They have had no exposure to other options. All they have experienced in computers is the Windows machine at their cubicle, so when they go shopping for a computer, they want what's familiar to them: a Windows machine.
If my professor and his firm switched over to linux, I'm pretty confidant his employees will want linux machines at home too. In non-tech industries, this trend seems to hold pretty steadfast - the real estate guys could care less about which OS they use, as long as it works for them both at work and at home.
Dude, a little at a time.
/. myself, at least those trying to inform me could reference me over to a few choice articles.
I was introduced to linux by a few co-workers. They taught and convinced me, and now I'll do the same to my friends.
These articles make great references when you're trying to teach people about linux. My co-workers often pointed me to a study or news tidbit to prove a point or garner support. Even if I were never to read
It spreads, slowly but surely.
And I'm in the business school. I can make it happen.
Ed and Lain joining forces would result in a serious mind fuck. The net would never be the same again. Sign me up!
Actually, the job I have now is with research at CIS under a prof. It's very interesting work and I'm learning a lot, but that doesn't hide the fact that it still doesn't cover my rent (which is very modest - under $300 a month). University research is great, but it doesn't always feed you. And as stated before, I didn't get my job through my resume, I got it by accidentally being in the right place at the right time - through a chance meeting and a misdirected e-mail. I was hired because the research is government funded and requires a certain quota of females/minorities on the staff, therefore they managed to squeeze me in on a team that was already full.
Almost every company that is worth interning for has recruiters.
I am currently an undergrad at UPenn engineering. I was also in the internship market this last semester (as I have been in the past two years). Overall, no matter what job market there has been, finding an iternship has been damn hard for me.
Find a job you're interested in
I'm also interested in practically anything related to computer science. I sent out about 30 resumes in the past two months alone, all to companies with openings that I would love to be in. Not one response. The job I have now was due to an accidental meeting, and barely pays enough for my rent, much less food. And I'm living in pennsylvania. Not exactly the height of luxury here.
Know what you're talking about
This is good advice, provided you get an interview in the first place. I didn't even get that far, so I had no chance to prove to anybody that I knew my stuff. You'd be surprised at how many recruiters that you call simply won't let you have even a first chance.
Have a good resume
Unfortunately, my resume doesn't have CMU stamped across the top. I don't think you realize how much that may do for you when an employer puts your resume alongside mine. I have been very active in school, and have quite a bit of fine arts experience alongside my cse classes. Community service and club activities and independent projects have done jack shit for me in terms of employment. I would never give up being an editor or a research advisor or any of the things I do that are unpaid. But those activities don't mean anything to an employer, at least in my experience. It's a Catch 22 - I haven't had any decent work experience in the field, so people don't want to hire me. But since people won't hire me due to my lack of experience, I will never get experience out in the field.
Go for it
You assume we all have connections and friends who can get us "in." I have two friends working at M$ right now, and there's nothing they can do about getting me hired, either at M$ or at any other software company. I hate to burst your bubble, but friends != job in many cases, despite what may have happened to you. And sometimes putting your resume into the "sea of crap" lands you a good job. It worked for my friend at Unisys, it just hasn't worked for me.
Bleh, that's all I can say. You have been very lucky, and I do not doubt that you also are very gifted and intelligent. Unfortunately, your positive experience with the job market does not mean there it's easy for the rest of us.
Even if I did live near a teaching hospital with a good library, the web often precedes paper publications.
Actually, since I'm not an avid reader of the major medicine journals, could i get a link on that or something? I know that the Wall Street Journal's online articles often experience a lag time in comparison to the publication, and I know the site for the Detroit Free Press doesn't update its articles before the paper goes out. I was not aware that the medical field was different.
You are confusing two issues here. It is one thing to actively spend money on things the community most values (Scientific American v Hustler) and quite another to actively spend money on censorship (filters aren't free).
Ah. but what if by subscribing to Scientific American, you automatically get an issue of Hustler bundled with it, stapled and intwined within the pages? Obviously, based on what the community values, you would rip out the pages of Hustler and leave only the SA to be put on display. And the library would be willing to pay somebody to sort through the Scientific Americans to make sure there aren't any Hustler pages still attached. I think that may better illustrate what I was trying to say. By having a connection to the internet, you not only get the valued info, but also the not quite so valuable info. You didn't ask for the porn to be there, but it is. Now, I know I'm stretching out this analogy, but I'm thinking from the point of view of my parents, who are frighteningly supportive of the filter idea. To them, it is a value to have the filter, just as it might be a value to have Scientific American as a magazine to read.
1) breast cancer is not entertaining. but giving somebody the ability to view breast cancer articles on the web, means very probably, porn sites can also be viewed. And porn is entertainment. I want my kids to be able to research breast cancer. But i don't want them looking at porn. The computer at the library is a gateway to both. And unless I am standing over my kid's shoulder every time he's at the computer (which I'm sure he'll appreciate), I can't be sure if he's really researching, or looking at porn. And believe me, even the best behaved children have snuck a peak at porn. Kids are rebels; you can't change that.
2) Note, my statement was that the computers in the library were not for entertainment. I agree that the library itself is a large source of entertainment (although how that explains the chessy romantic novel section, i can't tell you). But the computers there are not necessarily for that entertainment purpose. There is a time limit at my library for computer use, since we can only afford so many computers, and everybody wants to use them. Basically, you go in, you find what you need, check your hotmail account, print it out, and you're gone. If anybody at my library gets caught trolling a newsgroup or looking at something for entertainment rather than research, the angry looks follow you out and jump you at the car. I know, I've been there. This is not the case in all libraries, I'm sure. But I tend to see computers in libraries more as services rather than nodes of entertainment. Maybe it's just because I'm accustomed to my computer at home being a source of entertainment, so I regard the machines in the library as mere research resources, or e-mail machines. But whatever the case may be, the limited number of computers at my library aren't there for personal entertainment.
It's not about just seeing a *gasp* bare breast. Hell, if my kid wanted to see bare breasts, he/she could turn on MTV or HBO at a best friend's house and get plenty of breasts there (and more, in fact). You don't have to go to the library for that.
There's really no need for the public library to be a place where one can go to look at breasts. It's more about not allowing access to sites that are using the bare breasts out of a context in which a bare breast is acceptable. Breast cancer research, anatomy studies, these things are not porn. But allowing these things to be viewed on a public computer in the library, also can allow the pornographic stuff to be viewed. Therein lies the dilema. We want to keep the useful stuff, but the not-so-useful, in fact, sometimes downright distasteful ugly stuff, we want restricted. So what then? Well, then, it all depends upon the logistics of the filter. Who's the one to judge what exactly is "Unacceptable censorship of material adults (and in many cases even children) have the right to access"? Who draws the line at what your 6 yr old kid should be allowed to look at, and what he/she shouldn't?
Apparently, the government thinks it should be the one to draw the line. And I don't agree with that. I think there is need for a filter, but careful consideration needs to be put into that filter. And it seems like the consideration is simply not being put in.
Also, bad parenting does not mean your kids go look at porn. And kids who look at porn weren't necessarily raised a right or wrong way. It is difficult to be involved in your childrens' lives, when both you and your spouse work 9-7 jobs so you can pay for your childrens' clothes, food, and let them have a roof over their heads. They have friends that want to hang out with, they have activities they want to do that doesn't include mommy and daddy. The filter is more of a peace of mind for parents. Your kid goes to the library for 2 hours. You would feel better knowing that they won't be looking at porn sites in those 2 hours. I doubt the way a bare breast is presented in Cancer And You is anything like the way a bare breast is presented in Hot Naked Teen Sluts Click Here Now! If my parents had a choice, they would filter the public libraries too. And it's not because they are uninvolved, or they feel an ineffectual technology can compensate for parenting. It's because otherwise, they themselves have no direct control over the library's materials. At least with the filter, they know something is being done. And parents always want to meddle with the environment their kids grow up in.
I only skimmed the articles mentioned, but IMHO, there wasn't much being said on the details for the filtering. A lot depends very much the nature of the filter to be used. There wasn't much info on exactly what guidelines they plan to filter on, and which filter they wanted to use. Something the government's going to cook up? Something the librarians will determine? Something compromised in-between? I think the distinction between what is pornographic and what isn't is different for different groups. And the library has for years dealt with issues of censorship. I mean, libraries already filter out porn magazines and there are certainly no porn films in the AV section (although I only have my public libary to base these observations on). In a sense, there has been some slight filtering in the libraries already. The question is, how to make that leap from porn magazines to porn sites, and what might also be unfairly censored along the way. I think it's pretty much agreed that your 6 year old kid shouldn't be looking at porn. And parents have the right to expect that a city-funded public place will not expose their child to porn. The question is, how exactly does one create a methodology to tell a hardcore porn site from a medical anatomy chart on the web?
I'm not saying I know the right answer - I know how I would go about dealing with that distinction, but clearly it's a different process for everyone. I find I can agree with a filter only if that filter takes into account all these different views on what is porn and what is valid research material. And only if that filter is based not on a single group's input, but the input of many organizations and libraries. Though that's probably too much to hope for.
What if I'm too poor, too old, too backwards to own a computer (maybe I just like to read paperbacks when I'm at home), but my wife comes down with breast cancer. So, being the caring guy that I am, I treck down to the library and want to do some research so we can ask good questions of the oncologist during the course of treatment.
But why can't you do such research the "old-fashioned" way - with BOOKS? Yes, the library is there to provide services to the public. But those services don't include allowing minors to view pornographic material. I don't know about your library, but my library doesn't carry porn magazines. When you go through the magazines in my public library, you don't see "Hustler" up there with "Home and Garden" or "Pussy" on the same shelf as "Scientific American". There has already been some filtering in the sense that those types of material are simply not in the library's collection to begin with. They have been filtered out.
And you don't need the web to look up acticles on breast cancer or find a book that will allow you to read up on appropiate questions. If that material happens to be filtered out on the web, it is merely a means to justify the ends. And many libraries (mine included) charge you the same amount for printing as they do for the copy machine. So you're just the same financially, whether you photocopy info from a book or print it off the web.
I can see how the web is a helpful research tool, and why it is becoming more and more important to students. But the idea of having computers in the library is not for personal entertainment. The computers in libraries are for those who want to honestly do some research, and for those who feel they cannot go through the traditional route of research through books, magazines, film, etc. The filters are there to catch some of the nastier things out there on the net. Yes, some things not really considered "porn" will be filtered out as well. But if you have a legimate topic (breast cancer research), you can still find legitimate, relevant, current information in books and magazines. The web is not the end-all-be-all of resources in the library. And it's not the only form of filtering that goes on at a public library.
Agreed! (now for my plug....) In the CSE program I'm in, we are required to take extensive math classes. REQUIRED. At least 3 semesters of proof-based classes, then a very difficult math-based algorithms efficiency class. And the results are dramatic. If you can logic your way through a complicated proof correctly, you can logic your way through any implementation thrown at you. Or at least, you have been trained to logic your way through.
I have to agree that at a High School level, it's very difficult to find good computer science teachers. Most good programmers are not equally good teachers, especially to an age group as difficult to teach as high schoolers.
Personally, I'm at a university taking CS courses because frankly, I'm not motivated enough to learn anything without the pressure of a gpa on my back. I'm a slacker by nature, so forcing myself to attend an Ivy League has really made me get off my ass and learn. I'm also a audio/visual learner. I learn by listening, and by associating what i see (lecture) with what I do (homework). I don't believe that getting a CS degree necessarily makes me a better progammer than somebody without a degree. But I do believe that I'll gain skills going through the university life that those who do not go to college miss out on. And I have had some EXCELLENT professors in the CS department. Well, two, to be exact. And it was worth the ridiculous tuition I pay to have the privelege of being taught by those two professors.
As for good CS books - CS is an art form. You can't really learn it from a book. You can pick up a book on drawing, you can read all you want about techniques and materials, but in the end, you need to actually sit down and DO it. And no book will ever really be "good" at teaching programming, because programming is a process. Books will never measure up to simply trying out something to see if it works. There are good books out there to be used as references, and good books on the structure of languages, algorithms, and data types, but I don't think it's possible to write a book that teaches you how to program.
I don't know about your high school, but I stopped being spoon fed after middle school. HOW is not something you teach in a CS class. In a biology class, you are teach how a cell divides; in chem you are taught how a reaction takes place. But teaching you how to implement a linked list takes out all the application. So you've been given the code for a linked list. What did you learn by being handed that code? It's the process of doing the implementation yourself, of doing the coding yourself and figuring out what works and what doesn't, that trains you to be a programmer.
CS classes at my high school were not about teaching how, they were about teaching a way of thinking to get to how. You are given the tools - the definition of a linked list, and the syntax/logic of the language. The learning part comes from you putting the two together.
I've taken a High School CS course for AP and I'm not sure how I came out of it not hateing programing. For instance, when it came time to learn about linked lists, the book talked about what a linked list was. Then, it talked about what a linked list was. Then, it talked about what a linked list was. It never really said how to code the blasted thing. Not surprisingly, everyone failed the linked list test.
I have to agree with whoever said they would also have failed in real life. In real life, you would've been asked to implement the linked list without even knowing what the hell the specifications of it were. Do you think at any software development firm, they tell you how to code the thing? If they already knew how, they wouldn't be hiring somebody to do it for them.
Also, Microsoft software does not suck for a large portion of its users. For instance, my mid-50's parents. All they care about is being able to type up a letter in Word evey once in a while, print out an e-mail from Outlook, or buy a plane ticket online viewed in IE. Windows does all of that perfectly fine. They don't care about cool features, optimizations, or having a robust OS. If the computer crashes, they just reboot. They aren't losing ultra-important data, nor do they need to have their computer on 24/7. They want a simple user interface, icons to click, and the sense that they got something done. They don't think any of it "sucks" at all. And they certainly don't want to deal with an Linux install or anything other than what has already been simplied and laid out for them. Microsoft software only sucks to the people who can analyze it and for people who have run into problems with it. For my parents, Windows and Office are truly useful.
Also, you should note that AP classes do NOT cover everything in a college curriculum. Depending on the university, you miss out on a LOT by taking the AP credit and not re-taking the class at the unviersity level. Of course, this does depend upon the school. The type of CS classes you take in college depend vastly on where you go. And believe me, there are some schools that will hit you with things your AP CS teacher didn't even dream of touching.
And next is female geeks who just ooze sexuality.. bahh..I been looking for gorgeous female geeks all through my life.
:) Bitterness is a turn off. Most of the female geeks I know are not only hot, but intelligent - twice the fun in one. Being a female programmer, I can attest to the fact that my peers and I can hold our own, both technically and physically.
I beg to differ. You just need to look in the right places, my friend
Lastly but most important, society and babes in particular looks upon geeks and the tech community with disdain...
Only because there are often reasons for that disdain. Your mentality that nobody else but a fellow "geek" can comprehend your mind is a prime example. You won't get dates but automatically dismissing the possibility that a person can understand you. I personally find men of a technical nature very, very appealing, but only if they are willing to share their knowledge and are willing to learn from me as well. Perhaps it's not your geekiness that is preventing you from meeting babes, it's your attitude.
As for the movie - I haven't seen it yet, but am looking forward to seeing even a half-assed attempt at getting the open source movement out into the general public. Any publicity is good publicity, and if my non-tech friends have a greater appreciation for what I do after seeing it with me, then what more can I ask for?!
You obviously have not seen any other traditional hong kong martial arts fightng movies. The action sequences in CTHD were artfuly done, made into a deadly dance, made even more believable by the skill and athletic grace of the actors. The "flying," which elicited so much "nervous laughter" is supposed to signify the power and control of old fashioned martial artists. Chinese folk tales speak of powerful masters in ancient times who had the will of mind to "fly", who had enough control over their chi to manipulate mind and body, as well as their environment. It is no more stupid than stuff that happens in european fairy tales or fairy tales of any other origin. The fight scenes seemed "stupid" to you because you do not know any other way to categorize something you are unfamilar with. As for the dialogue - I am a native mandarin speaker, and if you watched the english dub, I can vouch that not everything was perfectly accurately translated. This is to be expected from any film translation into a foriegn language. In mandarin, the dialogue made perfect dramatic sense, and had bearing on moving the plot. Perhaps hearing the movie in its native language would make the plot more explicit. I think seeing it in subtitles takes a lot out of the emotion of the acting and the superb way each character was developed. If you can not think of a worse movie, then I suggest you go out and see every other movie that has been released this year, even in recent months (The Grinch, Dude Where's My Car, D&D, anything with a Friends actor in it).