The problem is that a worse standard is being applied.
Now that's an interesting proposal. I wonder how long it would take to come to a consensus on the meaning of 'worse'? And likely, it'd be biased, because we'd have old people on the decision committee:(
Why would you publish your competitive research in industry? I don't see SpaceX at conferences or publishing journal papers. They definitely aren't filing patents, according to Musk.
And besides, as a business owner, I'm not interested in paying for you to write that paper and shepherd it through the publication process. You're a smart guy or gal, I want you working on the next problem so we can all make money, not burnishing your resume with high impact factor pubs. Do it on your own time if you like, but make sure our IP lawyers have a chance to review it before you send the abstract in; you do recall that paper you signed when you hired on.
Ah, by research, you mean peer-reviewed, published research. I see we have the same words but different meanings. I wonder if that could cause misunderstanding.
You might not see the research results immediately, but they are protected (patents and such) and eventually pass into the general knowledge pool.
At least, in theory. Now, if IP laws weren't so restrictive...
Because, if he did, then you had a clear success criteria, and you failed to follow instructions.
And? I would think that anyone with a brain would already realize that's a terrible idea to begin with. I don't consider it a failing to not follow such ridiculous instructions.
Obviously not a great way to evaluate Gym class. Maybe the coach should have counted the number of pushups each person could do. That would be better, right?
No. Obviously not. Quantity is rarely better than quality. On the other hand, if someone says "for every hour you sit in this chair and do nothing, I'll give you $50", and you do it for 8 hours... well, it's a mind-numbingly stupid waste of time, but hey, quantity counts now, doesn't it?
Quantity is not a good indicator of quality, I wouldn't claim otherwise (except in certain circumstances, where it is).
And if you contract for something, and don't receive what you've agreed upon, you've been wronged.
However, if you've agreed to a contract... and suddenly you're not happy with the terms... it sounds like the other party isn't the one with the problem. If you had an implicit understanding that was contrary to the explicit contract with a university, and your notion of what you deserve is different from the facts, well... I feel bad for you. But I don't think you automatically deserve something more.
I don't disagree with your statement about quality, and I think you are correct that a university should train you in that field. I think you're wrong though - If a university is clear in what they are offering, and you don't want that BUT still went ahead with the relationship? Well... it's a bad relationship, and you can always leave, but you can't blame the university for letting you in.
Not if ignoring the instructions gives no advantages, neither to you, nor to someone you want to help, nor the society as a whole.
Exactly. If the whole point is to learn to follow instructions, and you don't follow instructions... well, you fail.
And, lets face it, we're talking about Gym Class, not Medical School, where, incidentally, you also learn to follow instructions (only, they call them procedures).
You completely misunderstand what this is about. The problem is that productivity is measured in number of publications, regardless of quality of said publications. Anything that can scape by the reviewers, often in a 3rd or 4th attempt counts. The guy that gets all his stuff published on the first attempt, because it is actually good, does not stand a chance, because he will never get the numbers.
The problem is that low quality publications actually represent negative productivity.
There have been alternative methods to quantitatively assess qualitative measurements. If it were possible, I like to think we'd be doing it.
Go to most science and engineering departments in the U.S. today, and you'll find senior faculty members sitting on P&T (promotion and tenure) committees who would never qualify for tenure if they were judged by the same standards they apply to junior faculty.
And how is that different from anywhere else? The old judge the young, on a standard that didn't exist before, and doesn't apply to them.
Case in point - How many senior managers are more qualified (educationally) than the people they are hiring?
And in industry they do no research at all any more.
Incorrect.
There is plenty of research done by industry (well, depending on the industry). It is generally not pure research, though. It's focused and should bring some sort of competitive advantage. Also, industry will not publish to the same extent, or in the same manner, because it isn't pure science.
Maybe this is less true in CS than it is in biology or psychology, but I don't even need to check for sources to know that pharmaceutical companies and chemical companies both do quite a bit of research.
That's the way it is. Keep the research papers churning, regardless of how utter crap they are, and more importantly keep the research grants flowing.
I remember the BBC did a programme a few years ago asking why people are so sceptical about science these days. This is exactly why.
No. There is a distinct difference between poor quality science and bad science.
There's also the public tendency to reduce everything to a simple answer, when it's rarely simple.
This reminds me of my Health class in high school. At the end of the semester (it was a 1-semester class only, usually the other semester was used for driver's ed), the crazy old teacher gave everyone a grade on their notebook. His method for determining the quality of your notebook? The number of pages in it. I got a bad grade, because I wrote small and had few pages, even though I wrote down everything important. The guy next to me had giant writing, and filled up a bunch of pages just writing "Health is cool!" and got a high grade.
You think Universities would be more intelligent in their rating of professors than some idiotic old gym coach, but apparently not.
Did the gym coach tell you how it was being marked? Because, if he did, then you had a clear success criteria, and you failed to follow instructions.
Now, if he didn't tell you it was being marked that way, that's just bad teaching practice. But no one is claiming that the universities are deceiving candidates - they're just requiring quantity, not quality. That's a different scenario than you described.
Tenure is based on regularly contributing to research. The publishing frequency is not really the determining factor. Unless you're really, REALLY slow, and never REALLY publish.
You're telling me that the contents of a medical supply truck could be dangerous?!
Oh wait, you're telling me they're VERY dangerous? As in, more lethal than lethal? More poisonous than poison? More toxic than... er... part of a bomb?
Sorry. The hijack and theft of a supply truck, in an area of the world known for theft and hijacking isn't news. Sure, it's dangerous and bad. But... news? Not really. Someone might look in the fridge and say "Hey, I've got the ingredients for Nachos, lets have Nachos". But even crazy people don't say "Hey, I just HAPPEN to have the ingredients for a dirty bomb. Why don't we do that instead of the other bombs we were going to build?".
A dirty bomb isn't a crime of opportunity, any more than another type of bomb. Let's not pretend otherwise.
...Iron Maiden had established a strong reputation and fan base before Internet piracy became a problem.
That's not really part of the argument, though - Maybe it should be, maybe it shouldn't be. Fact is, they have a strong brand that is valued by their fans.
Of course, you could always make a joke that the older fans don't actually understand the internet and its series of tubes.
Yeah, because it's something that everyone should be buying, despite the fact that:
so many are struggling financially
people want to live better and feel better
Right? It's got to be because of online shopping.
Yeah. We should definitely control it. That works out well for alcohol and marijuana and 32 oz cups of soda.
That much has become clear for quite a while now. What's also become clear is they don't know how to do it, what direction they're in and they're unusual recent behaviour is just a bunch of initial death throes.
Sorry, I thought you meant they didn't know how to throw their users overboard properly. You know, the way Apple and Microsoft do, with almost every unnecessary software (and hardware) update.
So they switch to SSL? Thats kind of the point of the DH exchange in SSL. Stealing the key later still doesn't get you access to the data since the DH exchange ensures that neither side ever transmits enough information to derive the key.
Because twitter security is important.
... particularly to big companies and brands. Maybe this will help them monetize their service?
Seems like a no-brainer to me. Why go out and dig up fossils when you can just print up a dino-bone. Gap in the fossil record? No problem. Just print up the missing link using a 3d morphing tool and be famous.
... and if you do carbon dating of the petroleum products used to make the plastic bones, they're both the APPROXIMATELY the same age, right?
Unlocked phones are becoming more available, and more carriers offer "bring-your-own-device" plans. So this should be offered as something you get installed by small phone retailers or, for more volume, bulk importers of phones and tablets. It's useful for people who don't want to be tied to Google or Apple online services.
Unlocked bootloader is not the same as network unlocked, unfortunately.
And considering the legislative environment, it may never be the same. Thankfully, unlocked phones (both network and bootloader) are becoming quite common - thanks, in part to google (and the nexus devices). Also, it's been "a thing" in europe for some time, I hear.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that a worse standard is being applied.
Now that's an interesting proposal. I wonder how long it would take to come to a consensus on the meaning of 'worse'? And likely, it'd be biased, because we'd have old people on the decision committee :(
Why would you publish your competitive research in industry? I don't see SpaceX at conferences or publishing journal papers. They definitely aren't filing patents, according to Musk.
And besides, as a business owner, I'm not interested in paying for you to write that paper and shepherd it through the publication process. You're a smart guy or gal, I want you working on the next problem so we can all make money, not burnishing your resume with high impact factor pubs. Do it on your own time if you like, but make sure our IP lawyers have a chance to review it before you send the abstract in; you do recall that paper you signed when you hired on.
Ah, by research, you mean peer-reviewed, published research. I see we have the same words but different meanings. I wonder if that could cause misunderstanding.
...
You might not see the research results immediately, but they are protected (patents and such) and eventually pass into the general knowledge pool.
At least, in theory. Now, if IP laws weren't so restrictive
Because, if he did, then you had a clear success criteria, and you failed to follow instructions.
And? I would think that anyone with a brain would already realize that's a terrible idea to begin with. I don't consider it a failing to not follow such ridiculous instructions.
Obviously not a great way to evaluate Gym class. Maybe the coach should have counted the number of pushups each person could do. That would be better, right?
... well, it's a mind-numbingly stupid waste of time, but hey, quantity counts now, doesn't it?
No. Obviously not. Quantity is rarely better than quality. On the other hand, if someone says "for every hour you sit in this chair and do nothing, I'll give you $50", and you do it for 8 hours
Quantity is not a good indicator of quality, I wouldn't claim otherwise (except in certain circumstances, where it is).
... and suddenly you're not happy with the terms ... it sounds like the other party isn't the one with the problem. If you had an implicit understanding that was contrary to the explicit contract with a university, and your notion of what you deserve is different from the facts, well ... I feel bad for you. But I don't think you automatically deserve something more.
... it's a bad relationship, and you can always leave, but you can't blame the university for letting you in.
And if you contract for something, and don't receive what you've agreed upon, you've been wronged.
However, if you've agreed to a contract
I don't disagree with your statement about quality, and I think you are correct that a university should train you in that field. I think you're wrong though - If a university is clear in what they are offering, and you don't want that BUT still went ahead with the relationship? Well
Not if ignoring the instructions gives no advantages, neither to you, nor to someone you want to help, nor the society as a whole.
Exactly. If the whole point is to learn to follow instructions, and you don't follow instructions... well, you fail.
And, lets face it, we're talking about Gym Class, not Medical School, where, incidentally, you also learn to follow instructions (only, they call them procedures).
You completely misunderstand what this is about. The problem is that productivity is measured in number of publications, regardless of quality of said publications. Anything that can scape by the reviewers, often in a 3rd or 4th attempt counts. The guy that gets all his stuff published on the first attempt, because it is actually good, does not stand a chance, because he will never get the numbers.
The problem is that low quality publications actually represent negative productivity.
There have been alternative methods to quantitatively assess qualitative measurements. If it were possible, I like to think we'd be doing it.
Go to most science and engineering departments in the U.S. today, and you'll find senior faculty members sitting on P&T (promotion and tenure) committees who would never qualify for tenure if they were judged by the same standards they apply to junior faculty.
And how is that different from anywhere else? The old judge the young, on a standard that didn't exist before, and doesn't apply to them.
Case in point - How many senior managers are more qualified (educationally) than the people they are hiring?
And in industry they do no research at all any more.
Incorrect.
There is plenty of research done by industry (well, depending on the industry). It is generally not pure research, though. It's focused and should bring some sort of competitive advantage. Also, industry will not publish to the same extent, or in the same manner, because it isn't pure science.
Maybe this is less true in CS than it is in biology or psychology, but I don't even need to check for sources to know that pharmaceutical companies and chemical companies both do quite a bit of research.
That's the way it is. Keep the research papers churning, regardless of how utter crap they are, and more importantly keep the research grants flowing. I remember the BBC did a programme a few years ago asking why people are so sceptical about science these days. This is exactly why.
No. There is a distinct difference between poor quality science and bad science.
There's also the public tendency to reduce everything to a simple answer, when it's rarely simple.
This reminds me of my Health class in high school. At the end of the semester (it was a 1-semester class only, usually the other semester was used for driver's ed), the crazy old teacher gave everyone a grade on their notebook. His method for determining the quality of your notebook? The number of pages in it. I got a bad grade, because I wrote small and had few pages, even though I wrote down everything important. The guy next to me had giant writing, and filled up a bunch of pages just writing "Health is cool!" and got a high grade.
You think Universities would be more intelligent in their rating of professors than some idiotic old gym coach, but apparently not.
Did the gym coach tell you how it was being marked? Because, if he did, then you had a clear success criteria, and you failed to follow instructions.
Now, if he didn't tell you it was being marked that way, that's just bad teaching practice. But no one is claiming that the universities are deceiving candidates - they're just requiring quantity, not quality. That's a different scenario than you described.
That ruins tenure.
Well, no.
Tenure is based on regularly contributing to research. The publishing frequency is not really the determining factor. Unless you're really, REALLY slow, and never REALLY publish.
You're telling me that the contents of a medical supply truck could be dangerous?!
... er ... part of a bomb?
... news? Not really. Someone might look in the fridge and say "Hey, I've got the ingredients for Nachos, lets have Nachos". But even crazy people don't say "Hey, I just HAPPEN to have the ingredients for a dirty bomb. Why don't we do that instead of the other bombs we were going to build?".
Oh wait, you're telling me they're VERY dangerous? As in, more lethal than lethal? More poisonous than poison? More toxic than
Sorry. The hijack and theft of a supply truck, in an area of the world known for theft and hijacking isn't news. Sure, it's dangerous and bad. But
A dirty bomb isn't a crime of opportunity, any more than another type of bomb. Let's not pretend otherwise.
We'll never go.
That's probably true of the Mediterranean Sea, for many middle-income families in North America.
...
... Of course, that's not the only consideration
...Iron Maiden had established a strong reputation and fan base before Internet piracy became a problem.
That's not really part of the argument, though - Maybe it should be, maybe it shouldn't be. Fact is, they have a strong brand that is valued by their fans.
Of course, you could always make a joke that the older fans don't actually understand the internet and its series of tubes.
Great. Slashdot has been subverted by the NSA ... again.
This time they're trying to push their propaganda on us. "Oh yes, botnets are bad, but oh my, aren't they neat?".
All of the company staff will get IRS jobs. They've shown the proper mindset.
IRS? Nah. Wall street. We never did fix those problems.
Yeah, because it's something that everyone should be buying, despite the fact that: so many are struggling financially people want to live better and feel better Right? It's got to be because of online shopping.
Yeah. We should definitely control it. That works out well for alcohol and marijuana and 32 oz cups of soda.
That much has become clear for quite a while now. What's also become clear is they don't know how to do it, what direction they're in and they're unusual recent behaviour is just a bunch of initial death throes.
Sorry, I thought you meant they didn't know how to throw their users overboard properly. You know, the way Apple and Microsoft do, with almost every unnecessary software (and hardware) update.
...that one of the "other, uncontrolled, mutations" turns out to be a cure for something." From the Roundup-resistant strawman.
My bet is on cure for hunger. Though, solving the problem of not enough money flowing from the poor to the rich might accidentally happen, too.
So they switch to SSL? Thats kind of the point of the DH exchange in SSL. Stealing the key later still doesn't get you access to the data since the DH exchange ensures that neither side ever transmits enough information to derive the key.
Because twitter security is important.
... particularly to big companies and brands. Maybe this will help them monetize their service?
Why was a weekday selected for this software update?
Should have been a tuesday. Then our windows updates and our transit updates would match! (... 14% ... for ... ever ...)
Seems like a no-brainer to me. Why go out and dig up fossils when you can just print up a dino-bone. Gap in the fossil record? No problem. Just print up the missing link using a 3d morphing tool and be famous.
... and if you do carbon dating of the petroleum products used to make the plastic bones, they're both the APPROXIMATELY the same age, right?
Unlocked phones are becoming more available, and more carriers offer "bring-your-own-device" plans. So this should be offered as something you get installed by small phone retailers or, for more volume, bulk importers of phones and tablets. It's useful for people who don't want to be tied to Google or Apple online services.
Unlocked bootloader is not the same as network unlocked, unfortunately.
And considering the legislative environment, it may never be the same. Thankfully, unlocked phones (both network and bootloader) are becoming quite common - thanks, in part to google (and the nexus devices). Also, it's been "a thing" in europe for some time, I hear.
ARMv6 is outdated, ARMv7 is the way to go. And I'd rather have a not-so-beefy GPU than one that takes binary firmware blobs.
Of course, if the tech doesn't fit, you must ... not purchase it. Or something like that
On the other hand, 2 million purchases seem to think that forking over $40 for a board isn't a TERRIBLE idea.
...and our distant descendants will gain the most accurate picture of us from our landfills, if we haven't already mined them out.
Sure, on our eating habits - Garbage in. But what if "garbage in = garbage out" doesn't hold true in the future?
Or what if they use our landfill as fossil fuel (wouldn't that be ironic)?