To my knowledge, the new surgical techniques were invented to reduce operation's side-effects (less invasive surgery, less anesthetics, less hospital recovery).
It also reduces the cost of an operation.
I found no relation with Jehovah witnesses, so I'm curious to listen where you heard about this ?
It is your body, and your choice what car to stick it in. Too bad you are doing so with dangerously misguided information. It's funny to think people say natural selection is not relevant in modern society!
Good points. I guess the 1949 Chevy truck my dad and I rebuilt back in the 1990s wasn't very safe for passengers. You'd get thrown from it or something. But it sure was safe itself. One time we had a car come flying around the corner to close and slammed into the left rear wheel well of the truck. The car was totaled. The truck had a small dent on the fender. (The metal is so much thicker on those old cars, we had to use a sledge hammer instead of a normal body work hammer to take the dent back out). But again, if we were IN the truck when that happened we probably would have not fared so well.
Modern steel is much stronger, the cars just crumple because they are supposed to.
I never did the same problem 95 times (I may have done 95 different problems, applying the same principles).
Neither did I, except in the classes where homework was graded in full, and comprised a significant portion of the grade. This is to allow people who can not do well on the test to pass the class.
So writing a paper is also "busy work"?
Under such limited perspective, pretty much any intellectual endeavour will just be "busy work".
This is a brilliant example of the strawman fallacy in debate. Such rhetorical skills must come from someone with the drive to complete college! My actual quote was: "Writing a paper about medieval lesbian vampire studies, is busy work." Being forced to write a paper--or take an entire class--about a highly specialized discipline in history, when you are not a history student, is busy work.
That is how people that didn't have the drive or will to go through higher education devalue the hard work of others. It's ok to vent frustration that way, but is fundamentally nonsense.
Your assumption is that I am commenting from some position of spite stemming from not having a degree or satisfactory life, while convenient, is incorrect. Using an ad hominem fallacy here is a bit trite anyways. Perhaps if you are looking to blame someone for the devaluation of university degrees--to vent your frustration upon, even--then you should take a hard look at the university system its self; particularly what motivates it, namely cash and graduation rates.
The problem is not with the people who work hard and pay attention in college. If you are in college, and you really care about what you are learning, then your education is invaluable. The problem is that they give degrees to everyone who completes the coursework, regardless of their actual interest, and in spite of any actual deeper understanding of the topics presented. The degree does not mean anything now, only the education.
Our problem is the assumption that education will cure all of societies ails. The only real way for a bureaucracy to measure education is to look at diplomas. Public measures taken to increase college graduation rates, then, operate with a misguided goal... they often find credentials instead of education. Throwing a birthday party does not make you a year older. Perhaps my original point is that normal universities, under an immense pressure to accept more students than ever, yet maintain historical drop out rates, are slowly morphing into degree mills.
Lots of theory, lots of real world cases, lots of brain storming. Most of my learning had little to do with books or homework. Almost all of my learning was in-class discussions.
And you could have gotten the same degree without any brainstorming or real world thinking... I think that is the gripe.
Having a university degree only proves that you are willing to do whatever busywork it takes to graduate
Horseshit.
Were that true, more than 15% of the workforce would have one.
Folding laundry is busywork. Graduating from a university is dedication, intellect and scholarship.
I love how the un-degreed always try to minimize the education of others.
To smart people, doing the same calculus problem ninety five times is also busy work. Writing a paper about medieval lesbian vampire studies, is busy work. Memorizing exactly how to solve a specific type of problem to pass a test, is busy work. There are ways to graduate without ever doing anything besides busy work.
The university degree has been minimized to the smallest possible degree, because the lowest slouch (you, probably) gets the same title as the most engaged scholar. The degree only guarantees that you slouched through college, beyond that your experience may vary.
My comment meant no disrespect to what you can learn in college, or the very smart people there. Your assumption is that I am commenting from some position of spite stemming from not having a degree or satisfactory life, but it is incorrect. If you are in college, and you really care about what you are learning, then your education is invaluable. The problem is that they give degrees to everyone who completes the coursework, regardless of their actual interest, and in spite of any actual deeper understanding of the topics presented. The degree does not mean anything, only the education.
Much of that is societies fault mind you. We put huge price tags on education and emphasizing garbage collection over real knowledge.
There is plenty of forced garbage collection at the university too. Any time you learn to solve a particular problem for a test, without learning how or why the solution works, it is just trivia, rubbish.
The problem today is that everyone is encouraged to obtain a university degree, really regardless of whether they want one or not, because otherwise it is hard to get a job. These students from a huge population of people who just want a piece of paper with their name on it, and it really does dilute the meaning of that document.
I view busywork as an easy to do thing that people can do compulsively to pass a class, instead of, or in lieu of, something which is actually difficult. Something which lets you pass a class with no brain, but a lot of gumption, and a brown nose.
What kind of windows shop does their own electrical wiring? Secondly, no reverse polarity protection?
Reverse polarity protection always involves a component which is destroyed to protect the rest of the device. It is still a warranty nightmare when a SMT diode or fuse is burnt on every shipped device.
I'm surprised by this. I was required to take an english course in college when getting my tech diploma. It's focus was on technical writing.
Also, have you mentioned to the engineer in question that it's "specification" and not "speckification"?
The problem is that you can take and pass a college level English class without actually giving half a shit about writing at an educated level. Having a university degree only proves that you are willing to do whatever busywork it takes to graduate, not that you actually know anything at all, that you paid attention in class, or even that you were smart in the first place.
The analogous question would be "If court orders for security camera footage are legitimate, why should we allow businesses and homes not to have security cameras?"
Software companies in the US are not currently legally required to provide encryption with backdoor access. It is concerning to think that a company would consider it to be in their best interest to provide such a back door to avoid abuse by the judicial system at some unforeseeable date in the future.
The court _can_ tell a private company to give information about a customer, or hand over information or things that belong to the customer and are in possession of the company. A company that rents out physical storage can be ordered to hand over the items that a suspected criminal has stored, and if they don't have a key they may have to unlock the storage with physical force which may damage the company's property.
What if a storage locker or safe contains pages of uuencoded data which appears random, but might be encrypted. Is it incumbent on the storage space to help law enforcement decrypt that data? Is this not similar to someone storing a locked safe that they own in a storage locker? Should the storage locker company be responsible for unlocking the customer's safe? Suppose that a communications provider is configured such that they only ever see data encrypted by the customer, using a key controlled by the customer... wouldn't providing law enforcement with the psuedo-entropy supplied by the customer be the extent of their requirement to, "hand over the items that a suspected criminal has stored"?
Certainly there is always someone to subpoena when data should be decrypted. The question is whether tech companies should always be the responsible party when someone obscures data, or when they provide encryption related services where they do not want to know the plaintext, only the cyphertext...
This is a case of service providers being abused to protect and confirm the government's ability to snoop in people's data without their knowledge.
Slashdot Mirror
Tolerance can be demanded, but respect must be earned?
I believe ether parent should be able to abort their children until the age of 18. They would call the school counselor and have the brat 'aborted'.
You mean the 72nd trimester.
He's a Jehovah Witness. He stuck his head in a box and it came to him.
I think you've confused them with Mormons, you soulless bastard.
No, the Mormon guy had magical glasses, dickhead.
Citation needed !
To my knowledge, the new surgical techniques were invented to reduce operation's side-effects (less invasive surgery, less anesthetics, less hospital recovery). It also reduces the cost of an operation.
I found no relation with Jehovah witnesses, so I'm curious to listen where you heard about this ?
I read about it in Awake!
I actually LOLed.
Thanks ! That was an interesting link, why didn't you mention it in your post ?
Get over yourself. Jeng is not your personal research assistant, and owes you nothing, citations included.
Not really interested in an intelligent debate on the topic? I suppose you were mostly trying to make yourself feel better ...
Then again, the New Yorker is probably safer than a drive by wire Toyota product.
"You'd lose that bet. And likely only once."
Likely not.
It is your body, and your choice what car to stick it in. Too bad you are doing so with dangerously misguided information. It's funny to think people say natural selection is not relevant in modern society!
Good points. I guess the 1949 Chevy truck my dad and I rebuilt back in the 1990s wasn't very safe for passengers. You'd get thrown from it or something. But it sure was safe itself. One time we had a car come flying around the corner to close and slammed into the left rear wheel well of the truck. The car was totaled. The truck had a small dent on the fender. (The metal is so much thicker on those old cars, we had to use a sledge hammer instead of a normal body work hammer to take the dent back out). But again, if we were IN the truck when that happened we probably would have not fared so well.
Modern steel is much stronger, the cars just crumple because they are supposed to.
How do we keep politics out of this?
If the scientists doing the research did not have an ambition to change public policy, that would probably help.
A bunch of foreign bankers have decided that they don't like that law, and so they are overruling it.
No, they are just not following it... but why would they? It only applies to US citizens.
I never did the same problem 95 times (I may have done 95 different problems, applying the same principles).
Neither did I, except in the classes where homework was graded in full, and comprised a significant portion of the grade. This is to allow people who can not do well on the test to pass the class.
So writing a paper is also "busy work"? Under such limited perspective, pretty much any intellectual endeavour will just be "busy work".
This is a brilliant example of the strawman fallacy in debate. Such rhetorical skills must come from someone with the drive to complete college! My actual quote was: "Writing a paper about medieval lesbian vampire studies, is busy work." Being forced to write a paper--or take an entire class--about a highly specialized discipline in history, when you are not a history student, is busy work.
That is how people that didn't have the drive or will to go through higher education devalue the hard work of others. It's ok to vent frustration that way, but is fundamentally nonsense.
Your assumption is that I am commenting from some position of spite stemming from not having a degree or satisfactory life, while convenient, is incorrect. Using an ad hominem fallacy here is a bit trite anyways. Perhaps if you are looking to blame someone for the devaluation of university degrees--to vent your frustration upon, even--then you should take a hard look at the university system its self; particularly what motivates it, namely cash and graduation rates.
The problem is not with the people who work hard and pay attention in college. If you are in college, and you really care about what you are learning, then your education is invaluable. The problem is that they give degrees to everyone who completes the coursework, regardless of their actual interest, and in spite of any actual deeper understanding of the topics presented. The degree does not mean anything now, only the education.
While writing your reply, this website might give you some fresh new ideas: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
Our problem is the assumption that education will cure all of societies ails. The only real way for a bureaucracy to measure education is to look at diplomas. Public measures taken to increase college graduation rates, then, operate with a misguided goal... they often find credentials instead of education. Throwing a birthday party does not make you a year older. Perhaps my original point is that normal universities, under an immense pressure to accept more students than ever, yet maintain historical drop out rates, are slowly morphing into degree mills.
I did not read any of your comment, and I will not.
Lots of theory, lots of real world cases, lots of brain storming. Most of my learning had little to do with books or homework. Almost all of my learning was in-class discussions.
And you could have gotten the same degree without any brainstorming or real world thinking... I think that is the gripe.
Having a university degree only proves that you are willing to do whatever busywork it takes to graduate
Horseshit.
Were that true, more than 15% of the workforce would have one.
Folding laundry is busywork. Graduating from a university is dedication, intellect and scholarship.
I love how the un-degreed always try to minimize the education of others.
To smart people, doing the same calculus problem ninety five times is also busy work. Writing a paper about medieval lesbian vampire studies, is busy work. Memorizing exactly how to solve a specific type of problem to pass a test, is busy work. There are ways to graduate without ever doing anything besides busy work.
The university degree has been minimized to the smallest possible degree, because the lowest slouch (you, probably) gets the same title as the most engaged scholar. The degree only guarantees that you slouched through college, beyond that your experience may vary.
He is just a curmudgeon, who sees you as a star shaped brick that he is trying to break the spirit off of, and jam into a square shaped hole.
Much of that is societies fault mind you. We put huge price tags on education and emphasizing garbage collection over real knowledge.
There is plenty of forced garbage collection at the university too. Any time you learn to solve a particular problem for a test, without learning how or why the solution works, it is just trivia, rubbish.
The problem today is that everyone is encouraged to obtain a university degree, really regardless of whether they want one or not, because otherwise it is hard to get a job. These students from a huge population of people who just want a piece of paper with their name on it, and it really does dilute the meaning of that document.
I view busywork as an easy to do thing that people can do compulsively to pass a class, instead of, or in lieu of, something which is actually difficult. Something which lets you pass a class with no brain, but a lot of gumption, and a brown nose.
What kind of windows shop does their own electrical wiring? Secondly, no reverse polarity protection?
Reverse polarity protection always involves a component which is destroyed to protect the rest of the device. It is still a warranty nightmare when a SMT diode or fuse is burnt on every shipped device.
I'm surprised by this. I was required to take an english course in college when getting my tech diploma. It's focus was on technical writing.
Also, have you mentioned to the engineer in question that it's "specification" and not "speckification"?
The problem is that you can take and pass a college level English class without actually giving half a shit about writing at an educated level. Having a university degree only proves that you are willing to do whatever busywork it takes to graduate, not that you actually know anything at all, that you paid attention in class, or even that you were smart in the first place.
where burqas (or cowboy hats) are worn is a reality.
Which country is supplying cowboy hat wearing low wage immigrant labor in Northern Europe?
I don't think fact and rational thought are major driving forces in this discussion.
The analogous question would be "If court orders for security camera footage are legitimate, why should we allow businesses and homes not to have security cameras?"
Well said.
The court _can_ tell a private company to give information about a customer, or hand over information or things that belong to the customer and are in possession of the company. A company that rents out physical storage can be ordered to hand over the items that a suspected criminal has stored, and if they don't have a key they may have to unlock the storage with physical force which may damage the company's property.
What if a storage locker or safe contains pages of uuencoded data which appears random, but might be encrypted. Is it incumbent on the storage space to help law enforcement decrypt that data? Is this not similar to someone storing a locked safe that they own in a storage locker? Should the storage locker company be responsible for unlocking the customer's safe? Suppose that a communications provider is configured such that they only ever see data encrypted by the customer, using a key controlled by the customer... wouldn't providing law enforcement with the psuedo-entropy supplied by the customer be the extent of their requirement to, "hand over the items that a suspected criminal has stored"?
Certainly there is always someone to subpoena when data should be decrypted. The question is whether tech companies should always be the responsible party when someone obscures data, or when they provide encryption related services where they do not want to know the plaintext, only the cyphertext...
This is a case of service providers being abused to protect and confirm the government's ability to snoop in people's data without their knowledge.