Modern employers all give people something like an IQ test, so it stands to reason that people who score highly on those types of tests will be more "successfully" employed.
See subject. Of course compact nations are going to have better connectivity than sprawling ones.
I don't often cheerlead the US, but it's impressive that they're in the top ten. Sweden only just pipped them, and it tries awesomely hard to provide its citizens with good 'net access.
Pretty sure you've missed entirely: A good state educational infrastructure (necessarily but not exclusively part of any Keynesian economy) is precisely to avoid training "incompetent boobs to do a half-ass job" merely because they or their daddies have access to a combination of money and cluelessness about the nation's needs. Instead, entrance eligibility and graduation depend on technical merit in light of national requirements.
For the alternative, see the previous US president.
Yes, I'm very much a first principles and "reduce it to something we've seen before" sort of person, but I too commonly get overwhelmed with increasing higher level complexity as I find it hard to know when to stop thinking at too low a level.
For someone with a mathematical background, I'm surprisingly un-visual - I see everything in terms of *connections*. But it does not harm to try new techniques. Yes, it's quite a challenge to know when there will be relevant feedback to an earlier part of a circuit.
So, for someone who is a complete butter-fingers, what would you recommend as simulation software sufficiently advanced that I can get to building and experimenting virtually at a faster rate than I have in the past with a board and/or iron? Ought I to spend some time sitting down with a book or two to teach me more formal techniques for circuit analysis? Cheers.
Is it a mere algorithm? An algorithm with a specific realised implementation?
Since I'm not currently in a country where mathematics can be owned, it seems weird to me.
Does any software company actually indicate that they would stop work if it were not for software patents? I.e. is there any company which says that it relies on software patents to do business in software, rather than as a defensive/offensive mechanism?
Yeah, pre-'80s there was a Keynesian notion of full employment which meant a certain degree of central planning to ensure that people were trained up competently for roles they could fill. While 100% employment (within the labour pool) will never be a thing, as some people will always be moving between jobs, this goal seemed more laudable than what we have now.
I always thought it was about EE requiring a *different* mindset rather than "more talent". There are lots of "run of the mill" EE jobs too, which don't require the full gamut of skills learnt e.g. during your degree programme - just as most software jobs won't require most of what you learnt at school.
My academic background is in mathematics. I found anything from the purest mathematics to the underlying physics relevant to EEs a lot easier that did the EEs I bumped into, yet I find circuit study entirely unintuitive. I keep thinking that I'm missing something when trying to design/troubleshoot some electronics (always merely for fun). Even something as simple as the various designs for an oscillator, I think, "OK, how come you immediately know it does this [assuming you don't just recognise the circuit from a textbook]? What prompted the original designer to try this particular circuit?" EEs I've met - unlike a lot of mathematicians, I think? - don't seem so keen on explaining their thought processes. This may sound weird, but I'd love to have one as a social friend, who would just lead me through building shit for fun.
Obviously this is a press release for Sourcefire, so... what are people's real-world experience with Snort? Have you used it successfully to block attacks?
Yes, I know a destructive colleague could just smash the 'phone, but there's a psychological barrier between causing mischief by swiping your hand across a screen, and being a physical vandal.
Isn't that learning through repetition? I was thinking the hypothesis was that a dog could copy something observed once. Otherwise the discovery is entirely uninteresting. Must RTFA...
Like I said: "businessmen in software" - you're demonstrating it well, Anonymous coward.
While "actual workers" have always had to deal with managers, helicopter management by overgrown software developers who slipped into the comfy chair is a newer phenomenon.
Short-sightedness is not seeing that we're just seeing the same old methods but with new names, more rules, and more paperwork. See other replies on this thread. But I couldn't help but hear you type your post with Cabaret's "Tomorrow belongs to me" playing in the background, and this made me laugh, so thanks.
I pretty much left the software development world when all this "Agile" bullshit became popular.
Over the past decade there has been an explosion of methodologies and metrics to coincide with a stagnation in fundamental developments in engineering. Contrary to what the young'uns think, there is very little that's appeared on the software scene that wasn't already there - and written more efficiently - either on the desktop in the '90s, or on the mainframe/cloud in the two decades prior. But what we do have is a whole pile of paperwork, of admin, of things to remember about how you're supposed to be doing things, of new ways to make creativity just that little bit harder.
So there is an *explosion* on all the new platforms of very similar software products, all developed the same way.
Stop it. Find out what works in your organisation, and evolve incrementally. Don't look to claims of revolutionary buzzwords.
The EDL is to UKIP as the NF is (was?) to the BNP. The difference is that the EDL pretends to be about anti-Islamic-law and UKIP about anti-foreign-law-in-general, whereas in practice their members are about intolerance of strangers, general thuggishness, and victory of the (perceived) strong.
...is for brokers to convince clients that they deserve a cut.
Any time someone tells you that they've devised a performance metric, spend five minutes thinking about what they've over-simplified. You wil, almost without exception, reject the metric, unless you have an agenda.
Slashdot Mirror
Modern employers all give people something like an IQ test, so it stands to reason that people who score highly on those types of tests will be more "successfully" employed.
Me and my cronies? Whatever you're reading into my post, it's not there.
It surprised me to learn recently that modern cars aren't that much more fuel efficient than many of nearly 80 years ago.
Only a digital system has a finite number of states, no?
See subject. Of course compact nations are going to have better connectivity than sprawling ones.
I don't often cheerlead the US, but it's impressive that they're in the top ten. Sweden only just pipped them, and it tries awesomely hard to provide its citizens with good 'net access.
Pretty sure you've missed entirely: A good state educational infrastructure (necessarily but not exclusively part of any Keynesian economy) is precisely to avoid training "incompetent boobs to do a half-ass job" merely because they or their daddies have access to a combination of money and cluelessness about the nation's needs. Instead, entrance eligibility and graduation depend on technical merit in light of national requirements.
For the alternative, see the previous US president.
Yes, I'm very much a first principles and "reduce it to something we've seen before" sort of person, but I too commonly get overwhelmed with increasing higher level complexity as I find it hard to know when to stop thinking at too low a level.
Thank you very much for the tips.
If you're an astronomer pro or amateur, or even if you merely enjoy the night sky, there most certainly is light pollution.
I've lived in both the middle of nowhere and in urban areas. The difference is staggering. (To air quality, too.)
Finding evidence of one contributory factor is not the same as disproving all other factors.
For someone with a mathematical background, I'm surprisingly un-visual - I see everything in terms of *connections*. But it does not harm to try new techniques. Yes, it's quite a challenge to know when there will be relevant feedback to an earlier part of a circuit.
So, for someone who is a complete butter-fingers, what would you recommend as simulation software sufficiently advanced that I can get to building and experimenting virtually at a faster rate than I have in the past with a board and/or iron? Ought I to spend some time sitting down with a book or two to teach me more formal techniques for circuit analysis? Cheers.
Is it a mere algorithm? An algorithm with a specific realised implementation?
Since I'm not currently in a country where mathematics can be owned, it seems weird to me.
Does any software company actually indicate that they would stop work if it were not for software patents? I.e. is there any company which says that it relies on software patents to do business in software, rather than as a defensive/offensive mechanism?
Yeah, pre-'80s there was a Keynesian notion of full employment which meant a certain degree of central planning to ensure that people were trained up competently for roles they could fill. While 100% employment (within the labour pool) will never be a thing, as some people will always be moving between jobs, this goal seemed more laudable than what we have now.
I always thought it was about EE requiring a *different* mindset rather than "more talent". There are lots of "run of the mill" EE jobs too, which don't require the full gamut of skills learnt e.g. during your degree programme - just as most software jobs won't require most of what you learnt at school.
My academic background is in mathematics. I found anything from the purest mathematics to the underlying physics relevant to EEs a lot easier that did the EEs I bumped into, yet I find circuit study entirely unintuitive. I keep thinking that I'm missing something when trying to design/troubleshoot some electronics (always merely for fun). Even something as simple as the various designs for an oscillator, I think, "OK, how come you immediately know it does this [assuming you don't just recognise the circuit from a textbook]? What prompted the original designer to try this particular circuit?" EEs I've met - unlike a lot of mathematicians, I think? - don't seem so keen on explaining their thought processes. This may sound weird, but I'd love to have one as a social friend, who would just lead me through building shit for fun.
What is OP's definition of "full employment"? Not sure it's the same as mine.
Obviously this is a press release for Sourcefire, so... what are people's real-world experience with Snort? Have you used it successfully to block attacks?
The big boys build weaponry to keep each other in check, and to eliminate all the smaller boys.
Works nicely for them all.
Don't know why they'd rock the boat.
Every developer has USB debugging enabled and 'phone rooted, after all.
The fuck? It's that easy to cause hassle?
Yes, I know a destructive colleague could just smash the 'phone, but there's a psychological barrier between causing mischief by swiping your hand across a screen, and being a physical vandal.
Isn't that learning through repetition? I was thinking the hypothesis was that a dog could copy something observed once. Otherwise the discovery is entirely uninteresting. Must RTFA...
Like I said: "businessmen in software" - you're demonstrating it well, Anonymous coward.
While "actual workers" have always had to deal with managers, helicopter management by overgrown software developers who slipped into the comfy chair is a newer phenomenon.
Short-sightedness is not seeing that we're just seeing the same old methods but with new names, more rules, and more paperwork. See other replies on this thread. But I couldn't help but hear you type your post with Cabaret's "Tomorrow belongs to me" playing in the background, and this made me laugh, so thanks.
So what you're saying is that we should reinvent Debian?
You're welcome on my lawn, but please don't re-enact history on it...
I pretty much left the software development world when all this "Agile" bullshit became popular.
Over the past decade there has been an explosion of methodologies and metrics to coincide with a stagnation in fundamental developments in engineering. Contrary to what the young'uns think, there is very little that's appeared on the software scene that wasn't already there - and written more efficiently - either on the desktop in the '90s, or on the mainframe/cloud in the two decades prior. But what we do have is a whole pile of paperwork, of admin, of things to remember about how you're supposed to be doing things, of new ways to make creativity just that little bit harder.
So there is an *explosion* on all the new platforms of very similar software products, all developed the same way.
Stop it. Find out what works in your organisation, and evolve incrementally. Don't look to claims of revolutionary buzzwords.
The EDL is to UKIP as the NF is (was?) to the BNP. The difference is that the EDL pretends to be about anti-Islamic-law and UKIP about anti-foreign-law-in-general, whereas in practice their members are about intolerance of strangers, general thuggishness, and victory of the (perceived) strong.
UKIP includes, on-topic for this thread, quite a number of homophobes.
...is for brokers to convince clients that they deserve a cut.
Any time someone tells you that they've devised a performance metric, spend five minutes thinking about what they've over-simplified. You wil, almost without exception, reject the metric, unless you have an agenda.