It isn't damage control. It is technician stupidity.
Apologists need to stop trotting out equivalents to, "Don't attribute to malice.. bla bla stupidity," at every corner.
It's not the middle of the 20th century. We're awash with excellent physicists who can't find a job, and I can assure you that everyone in the highly competitive Japan who has a job in the nuclear industry has the technical ability.
What they don't have is a moral compass: it's a very obeisant culture.
Capitalism's not just about financial capital: it's about intellectual (you might have this) and social (many geeks don't have this, although the stereotype's changed).
I happen not to like the way things work, but this is how they work.
Math is easy, especially at undergrad/Masters level: you either get it right or you don't.
Almost all other courses are subjective, and depend on the whims of the professors.
Oddly enough, I've also found mathematics lecturers to be some of the most egalitarian in all matters other than mathematical ability. Maybe I've been lucky, but it's been beautiful.
My evidence is that there is far easier access to source material, that PhD programmes tend to be more structured with supervisors being fairly specific about the sort of thing they want from students (this may mean a restriction of creativity, but it also means you're more likely to succeed if you follow what is wanted of you), that there are many more PhD-award opportunities some of questionable standard (I wouldn't say this applies to this specific cohort!), &c. It used to be very much a "find your own thing and do it" - now (particularly in sciences) it's, "We have so much fucking data and we need to do so much with it, so if you can pick one of the things we need to do then there's your dissertation topic.."
Again, it's not a bad thing. It's just that the meaning of "PhD" has changed.
There's no need to stereotype me on the basis of a single opinion about a single thing, lol. In most ways I think modern life is far harder than ~40 years ago - Reaganism/Thatcherism has really fucked up a great pair of continents.
By not reaching the threshold required for entry stipulated by the provider of the test.
The whole point is that IQ tests are being abused as academic/commercial assessments rather than clinical tests to help people with particular learning requirements.
Is this the room for an argument about when Western civilisation was born? Because "over two millennia" is pretty uncontentious, whereas "roughly three millennia" is questionable. Unless you're one of those liberal arts types who thinks "over two" means "about exactly two".
An unnecessarily overpowered chip will be delayed, so more of the hardware features no one asked for will be delivered to a market that usually works in symbiosis with the Microsoft inefficiency treadmill but is now being destroyed entirely by that same company.
Getting a PhD is nothing like it used to be. The whole process has become industrialised since I was young, and - while it's excellent that there *is* so much support - it doesn't represent the independent intellectual achievement that it once did.
So, while I'm very happy that there are so many people training at this level, they shouldn't think they're that great.
IQ tests correlate very well with a variety of indicators of success in life
Of course they do. Colleges and businesses filter on IQ test performance. So in fact IQ test performance isn't merely correlative, but causative!
There is no way to "beat" an IQ test other than by having someone else take the test.
Or, you know, doing what you do with every other test: maintain a healthy body and clear mind; motivate yourself; learn what the test is going to look like; and practice.
Or for helping people spot the patterns needed to pass an IQ test, &c. &c.
Psychology is a very young science that nevertheless has ended up managing to dominate way too much human activity. It is embarrassing that over two millennia after the birth of Western civilisation,we have degenerated to a point where we still believe that simple indicators can determine whether someone will steal, lie, or be just wonderful.
I honestly get nothing at all from Wikipedia. StackExchange is useful, but that is like you say a content growth thing. I appreciate Wolfram Alpha! I have been using Mathematica since the '90s, and it came with a philosophy which has so much potential. I am not sure it's incredibly useful just yet, and a lot of simple things you hope to give useful answers just bring back generic crap - but I have hope.
I'm sorry but long streaming videos are *not* far more instructional than what can be achieved with mark-up.
The video lecture format has a one-size-fits-nobody delivery rate, and you can't even decide how much information to show in front of you at once.
It's possible that people with poor attention spans do better with TV, but that's a different problem which isn't solved by more TV.
Yes, if you *enjoy* copious amounts of high resolution video, the modern Internet is better for that sort of *entertainment*. But it doesn't help people learn more.
I'm finding that I'm not learning any more from the Internet now than the Internet of 13 years ago.
There's a lot more shiny and noise, and web pages which used to be optimised for efficient downloading are now optimised for nothing at all.
It's like comparing Windows NT 4 with 8, or Adobe Reader 3 with XI: the functionality that most people need to get work done has been there for a very long time.
Nah, it's more something watched by dime-a-dozen geeks who think being able to code quicksort makes them intellectually superior specimens of humanity.
Capitalism's just continuing to do what it does best: exploiting the hard work of others.
The Romanian education system - and, indeed, the entire (legacy of the) Soviet/satellite education system - was heavily biased toward excellence in mathematics and engineering. So much so that a Western school mathematics course looks remedial.
Having beneftted from this, philosophically empty and socially incompetent graduates are seduced by dreams of power and money in the West. The exploitation continues, nothing improves, but a few clever people get rich.
Slashdot Mirror
The end of the world is neigh?
OMG PONIES.
It isn't damage control. It is technician stupidity.
Apologists need to stop trotting out equivalents to, "Don't attribute to malice.. bla bla stupidity," at every corner.
It's not the middle of the 20th century. We're awash with excellent physicists who can't find a job, and I can assure you that everyone in the highly competitive Japan who has a job in the nuclear industry has the technical ability.
What they don't have is a moral compass: it's a very obeisant culture.
Nothing to do with ability to intercept.
Over 50% of jobs are got through networking.
Capitalism's not just about financial capital: it's about intellectual (you might have this) and social (many geeks don't have this, although the stereotype's changed).
I happen not to like the way things work, but this is how they work.
Math is easy, especially at undergrad/Masters level: you either get it right or you don't.
Almost all other courses are subjective, and depend on the whims of the professors.
Oddly enough, I've also found mathematics lecturers to be some of the most egalitarian in all matters other than mathematical ability. Maybe I've been lucky, but it's been beautiful.
My evidence is that there is far easier access to source material, that PhD programmes tend to be more structured with supervisors being fairly specific about the sort of thing they want from students (this may mean a restriction of creativity, but it also means you're more likely to succeed if you follow what is wanted of you), that there are many more PhD-award opportunities some of questionable standard (I wouldn't say this applies to this specific cohort!), &c. It used to be very much a "find your own thing and do it" - now (particularly in sciences) it's, "We have so much fucking data and we need to do so much with it, so if you can pick one of the things we need to do then there's your dissertation topic.."
Again, it's not a bad thing. It's just that the meaning of "PhD" has changed.
There's no need to stereotype me on the basis of a single opinion about a single thing, lol. In most ways I think modern life is far harder than ~40 years ago - Reaganism/Thatcherism has really fucked up a great pair of continents.
By not reaching the threshold required for entry stipulated by the provider of the test.
The whole point is that IQ tests are being abused as academic/commercial assessments rather than clinical tests to help people with particular learning requirements.
Is this the room for an argument about when Western civilisation was born? Because "over two millennia" is pretty uncontentious, whereas "roughly three millennia" is questionable. Unless you're one of those liberal arts types who thinks "over two" means "about exactly two".
An unnecessarily overpowered chip will be delayed, so more of the hardware features no one asked for will be delivered to a market that usually works in symbiosis with the Microsoft inefficiency treadmill but is now being destroyed entirely by that same company.
Indeed. The proper purpose of an IQ test is in a medical setting to assist people with particular learning needs.
It is impractical and inappropriate to use it as a cookie cutter admissions test for anything.
Getting a PhD is nothing like it used to be. The whole process has become industrialised since I was young, and - while it's excellent that there *is* so much support - it doesn't represent the independent intellectual achievement that it once did.
So, while I'm very happy that there are so many people training at this level, they shouldn't think they're that great.
Eh, I do? Quality scheduled entertainment is much more efficient and of higher quality than millions of unicast channels.
IQ tests correlate very well with a variety of indicators of success in life
Of course they do. Colleges and businesses filter on IQ test performance. So in fact IQ test performance isn't merely correlative, but causative!
There is no way to "beat" an IQ test other than by having someone else take the test.
Or, you know, doing what you do with every other test: maintain a healthy body and clear mind; motivate yourself; learn what the test is going to look like; and practice.
Is "ostensible" a word in American English?
Or for helping people spot the patterns needed to pass an IQ test, &c. &c.
Psychology is a very young science that nevertheless has ended up managing to dominate way too much human activity. It is embarrassing that over two millennia after the birth of Western civilisation ,we have degenerated to a point where we still believe that simple indicators can determine whether someone will steal, lie, or be just wonderful.
The purpose of the First Amendment is to give people the freedom to say as many things as they want as long as nobody listens.
I honestly get nothing at all from Wikipedia. StackExchange is useful, but that is like you say a content growth thing. I appreciate Wolfram Alpha! I have been using Mathematica since the '90s, and it came with a philosophy which has so much potential. I am not sure it's incredibly useful just yet, and a lot of simple things you hope to give useful answers just bring back generic crap - but I have hope.
I'm sorry but long streaming videos are *not* far more instructional than what can be achieved with mark-up.
The video lecture format has a one-size-fits-nobody delivery rate, and you can't even decide how much information to show in front of you at once.
It's possible that people with poor attention spans do better with TV, but that's a different problem which isn't solved by more TV.
Yes, if you *enjoy* copious amounts of high resolution video, the modern Internet is better for that sort of *entertainment*. But it doesn't help people learn more.
competition! consumerism! capitalism! money! profit!
Humanity: having the ability but lacking the decency to just cooperate since, well, forever.
I'm finding that I'm not learning any more from the Internet now than the Internet of 13 years ago.
There's a lot more shiny and noise, and web pages which used to be optimised for efficient downloading are now optimised for nothing at all.
It's like comparing Windows NT 4 with 8, or Adobe Reader 3 with XI: the functionality that most people need to get work done has been there for a very long time.
Indeed. The US Treasury paid for Skype.
And that, friends, means that the people paid for Skype.
But don't expect the profits to go to you.
American capitalism: capitalise the profits; socialise the costs.
Nah, it's more something watched by dime-a-dozen geeks who think being able to code quicksort makes them intellectually superior specimens of humanity.
Capitalism's just continuing to do what it does best: exploiting the hard work of others.
The Romanian education system - and, indeed, the entire (legacy of the) Soviet/satellite education system - was heavily biased toward excellence in mathematics and engineering. So much so that a Western school mathematics course looks remedial.
Having beneftted from this, philosophically empty and socially incompetent graduates are seduced by dreams of power and money in the West. The exploitation continues, nothing improves, but a few clever people get rich.
Nick Hawes sounds like just another tired academic jumping on the bandwagon of grant money for security applications.
Shame on him.
And how do you define "god", dear sir?