One of our local universities routinely surveys its students upon completion of corporate summer internships and gives the area companies the results. We like their interns, so we read the report very closely. A couple of years ago they released results that contained a significant trend- the vast majority were happy with their internships and enthusiastic about pursuing a career in the field in which they interned, with one exception, you guessed it, IT. The number one reason given was the learning fatigue- they didn't want to keep up with the pace of technological change. (As I recall, being treated like dirt, the usual reason for intern dissatisfaction, was a distant second.)
So if you think you would be happier in another field, you're not alone and you're probably right. My advice to you is to start planning that career change now, because I am older than you and let me tell ya, sonny, it doesn't get easier, it gets harder, to keep up.
"he resulting set of skills [from today's educational practices] is insufficient for today's software industry (in particular for safety and security purposes)
Seconded. Speaking professionally, the number of programmers I trust to write a secure/stable application is vastly smaller than the number I would trust to whip up a typical business app, and a profound lack of appreciation for the relevant system details is usually the reason why. But it's a big leap to blame that on Java - the more general academic trend of dumbing down curricula (at least in the US) is more suspect.
In close to a decade now of workplace programming, I have yet to actually have a need for any systems level programming of any kind.
I wonder whether the engineers supporting your production hardware would agree with you.;-)
Not that being conversant in systems is important in every practical application, but, speaking as a systems engineer, I do prefer to work with developers that understand it.
Agreed, but I wouldn't stop with the generals. It's been amply documented that the Bush administration in general and Donald Rumsfeld in particular put a number of generals in a bad position, to which many have publicly objected, through a series of clueless strategic and political decisions.
I doubt this for two reasons:
1. The generals had plenty of latitude already but were unable to understand the enemy and fight the war competently. The notion that our hands were somehow tied in Vietnam has no basis in fact.
2. Popular support for the Viet Cong, the NVA and the Communists in general were very high. The South Vietnamese government was almost comically corrupt, which is distinctly different from the South Korean governments of any post-conflict era. Even if we were to win militarily, we could not win any peace that we could ever have imposed. There was no chance for a stable, prosperous Vietnam under any regime of the time that we supported.
I disagree with the use of the term 'evolution' to discuss the inadequacy of emotional responses to threats. People can be successfully trained to overcome these issues. As a security professional, I know my spidey-sense has altered considerably over the years due to training and experience, and I would think that others in fields where risk assessment is all in a day's work have largely had the same experience, and, to a certain extent, this is extensible to the population at large. (For example, I find that younger employees are typically a lot more savvy about safe online usage than older employees, which is not a matter of evolution, but acculturation to technology.) The evolutionary advantage of rationality outweighs the primacy of fight-or-flight responses in trained individuals.
This looks to me like another misquoted/misunderstood Bruce Schneier sound bite. Not much to see here.
Or, we can live with the minority percentage of mods who abuse the ability to mod posts negative out of spite, malice, immaturity or laziness, and take our karma only as seriously as it should be, and not more so.
IMO the best filter for this sort of behavior is to let it roll off, rather than increase the number of carping, acrimonious meta posts about moderation, which I have apparently just incremented, dammit.
I use active parenting (regular conversation) and passive monitoring (snort). Works great. I have not disclosed to the kids that home usage is monitored, but the timing and content of certain innocent conversations about the Internet has been influenced by what I've seen there. We all know that they can circumvent it but I try to passively encourage home Internet use as opposed to use outside the home, and don't make an issue of small things.
I actually care a great deal more about chat rooms than porn, and about the physical location of the kids as opposed to the logical location. Full disclosure of one's location and companions at all times, and the carrying of a charged mobile phone, is an ironclad household rule, and we make an effort to know their friends.
Slashdot Mirror
IT is no place for someone with learning fatigue.
One of our local universities routinely surveys its students upon completion of corporate summer internships and gives the area companies the results. We like their interns, so we read the report very closely. A couple of years ago they released results that contained a significant trend- the vast majority were happy with their internships and enthusiastic about pursuing a career in the field in which they interned, with one exception, you guessed it, IT. The number one reason given was the learning fatigue- they didn't want to keep up with the pace of technological change. (As I recall, being treated like dirt, the usual reason for intern dissatisfaction, was a distant second.)
So if you think you would be happier in another field, you're not alone and you're probably right. My advice to you is to start planning that career change now, because I am older than you and let me tell ya, sonny, it doesn't get easier, it gets harder, to keep up.
Good luck.
The current method doesn't favor big states. FTA, "the current method has an inherent bias towards giving small states a boost up".
"he resulting set of skills [from today's educational practices] is insufficient for today's software industry (in particular for safety and security purposes)
Seconded. Speaking professionally, the number of programmers I trust to write a secure/stable application is vastly smaller than the number I would trust to whip up a typical business app, and a profound lack of appreciation for the relevant system details is usually the reason why. But it's a big leap to blame that on Java - the more general academic trend of dumbing down curricula (at least in the US) is more suspect.
In close to a decade now of workplace programming, I have yet to actually have a need for any systems level programming of any kind.
;-)
I wonder whether the engineers supporting your production hardware would agree with you.
Not that being conversant in systems is important in every practical application, but, speaking as a systems engineer, I do prefer to work with developers that understand it.
The impact would probably send dust high into the atmosphere
No signal, indeed. I seem to recall dust interference inhibiting communications recently. I bet the Spirit and Opportunity teams are not so excited.
He should have taken the blue pill.
Qwest didn't comply with similar requests, and there were no adverse consequences for them.
Their former CEO says otherwise. Granted, he's a convicted felon now, but that doesn't mean this allegation isn't worth a look.
The Web wasn't invented until 1991, you young whippersnapper
Wired Magazine famously squatted mcdonalds.com in 1994. Worth a read for those wondering what the pre-dot-com corporate mentality was like.
Agreed, but I wouldn't stop with the generals. It's been amply documented that the Bush administration in general and Donald Rumsfeld in particular put a number of generals in a bad position, to which many have publicly objected, through a series of clueless strategic and political decisions.
I doubt this for two reasons: 1. The generals had plenty of latitude already but were unable to understand the enemy and fight the war competently. The notion that our hands were somehow tied in Vietnam has no basis in fact. 2. Popular support for the Viet Cong, the NVA and the Communists in general were very high. The South Vietnamese government was almost comically corrupt, which is distinctly different from the South Korean governments of any post-conflict era. Even if we were to win militarily, we could not win any peace that we could ever have imposed. There was no chance for a stable, prosperous Vietnam under any regime of the time that we supported.
I think you meant "empirical" not "imperial". But "imperial" is definitely funnier. The article sounds interesting; do you have a cite for it?
Interestingly, the news interviewed a friend of his who apparently hadn't noticed anything much more than the kid keeping to himself.
As an acquaintance of another school shooter (Gang Lu) I am not surprised by this observation. No one saw it coming then, either.
Ultimately, much depends on the survival of the shooter.
His death is now being reported.
Ah crap, you're that Cheeto-eating fat guy in the next cube!!! Beano, dude, Beano!
Oh, and I want my stapler back. Get your own.
Bad example. Every man loves the smell of his own farts.
Cover Your Ass
(for all you non-US folks)
There were in South Africa anyway.
I disagree with the use of the term 'evolution' to discuss the inadequacy of emotional responses to threats. People can be successfully trained to overcome these issues. As a security professional, I know my spidey-sense has altered considerably over the years due to training and experience, and I would think that others in fields where risk assessment is all in a day's work have largely had the same experience, and, to a certain extent, this is extensible to the population at large. (For example, I find that younger employees are typically a lot more savvy about safe online usage than older employees, which is not a matter of evolution, but acculturation to technology.) The evolutionary advantage of rationality outweighs the primacy of fight-or-flight responses in trained individuals.
This looks to me like another misquoted/misunderstood Bruce Schneier sound bite. Not much to see here.
Or, we can live with the minority percentage of mods who abuse the ability to mod posts negative out of spite, malice, immaturity or laziness, and take our karma only as seriously as it should be, and not more so.
IMO the best filter for this sort of behavior is to let it roll off, rather than increase the number of carping, acrimonious meta posts about moderation, which I have apparently just incremented, dammit.
Ah yes, now I remember reading this back then and wanting my five minutes back. Now, it's even funnier. Thanks for the memories!
Hopefully something silly about the New Economy. I need a good laugh.
I use active parenting (regular conversation) and passive monitoring (snort). Works great. I have not disclosed to the kids that home usage is monitored, but the timing and content of certain innocent conversations about the Internet has been influenced by what I've seen there. We all know that they can circumvent it but I try to passively encourage home Internet use as opposed to use outside the home, and don't make an issue of small things.
I actually care a great deal more about chat rooms than porn, and about the physical location of the kids as opposed to the logical location. Full disclosure of one's location and companions at all times, and the carrying of a charged mobile phone, is an ironclad household rule, and we make an effort to know their friends.
None of these things are attainable goals, as they are so undefined and nonspecific as to be useless.
Well, not entirely. "Abolishing capital punishment" is pretty specific.
Interesting and accurate. Thanks for the link!
I say, hooray. NASA has better things to do, e.g. support science. Unmanned missions are a far better value.