I think this is hella cool, but the slant in the article seemed a bit anti-intellectual. like they were trying to tell the kid "good work, son, but remember that's only book-larnin." I dunno, maybe it was just me.
just a note. I went to college for one year. it was a liberal arts school with no computers except for a few macs for word processing. I dropped out. now I'm a web developer in the bay area doing java, perl, weblogic, etc.
if yr wondering what companies are looking for, they're looking for work experience. beyond that they won't give a flying fsck. you could get a major in bestiality if you wanted, all that actually matters is that once you do get a job, you do good work and learn useful skills.
I'd say don't sweat it at all. study whatever you feel like studying. don't waste time wondering what potential employers are looking for, bkz the fact of the matter is that, with the exception of the first job you get, yr education is not really gonna mean anything to anyone. unless you have a PhD in cryptography or something equally interesting and unusual.
which you'd basically only get by studying what interested you to begin with.:-)
I live in the Bay Area bkz I like the way I can live here. It's all abt the lifestyle. I work for companies here bkz they're convenient. I'm a techie and I could probably get a job anywhere in the world that techies get jobs.
But liquor laws have nothing to do with it. As far as I can tell Utah is a theocracy, and an insane one at that. They have a porn czar, for God's sake. And she's a 40-yr-old virgin. In any sane country the woman would either be treated for whatever psychological issues she has or left to resolve them on her own. She wouldn't be given a government mandate to crack down on pornography.
Not that any sane countries exist, as far as I can tell.
yr argument is ideological in nature. in a Free Society, this would be true; ergo this is what we should do. like most ideological, didactic arguments, it totally fails to notice relevant facts:
The United States government has no business telling a creator what they must do with their copyrighted work.
I agree with that, but if you drop the Libertarian dogma for a second, you might notice that the real restrictions of freedom in 2001 come from corporations, not government -- at least in the USA. The RIAA has no business telling me what I can or can't do with music I've paid for and bought. Once I've paid for it, it's mine.
Microsoft seems a bit like the neurotic who you always knew was a little bit wacky but who suddenly turns out to be absolutely, unequivocally, 100% batshit insane. are you kidding me?? outlaw open source?
I was always a little unsure abt the arguments that source code is "speech" in the sense of the First Amendment's speech protections, but this M$ thing has me a believer. it's a real-life reductio ad absurdum.
this is flat-out the most lunatic argument I've ever seen emerge from the business world, and I own books by Peter Drucker.
Slashdot Mirror
1: p2p
2: genome
I think this is hella cool, but the slant in the article seemed a bit anti-intellectual. like they were trying to tell the kid "good work, son, but remember that's only book-larnin." I dunno, maybe it was just me.
just a note. I went to college for one year. it was a liberal arts school with no computers except for a few macs for word processing. I dropped out. now I'm a web developer in the bay area doing java, perl, weblogic, etc.
:-)
if yr wondering what companies are looking for, they're looking for work experience. beyond that they won't give a flying fsck. you could get a major in bestiality if you wanted, all that actually matters is that once you do get a job, you do good work and learn useful skills.
I'd say don't sweat it at all. study whatever you feel like studying. don't waste time wondering what potential employers are looking for, bkz the fact of the matter is that, with the exception of the first job you get, yr education is not really gonna mean anything to anyone. unless you have a PhD in cryptography or something equally interesting and unusual.
which you'd basically only get by studying what interested you to begin with.
I live in the Bay Area bkz I like the way I can live here. It's all abt the lifestyle. I work for companies here bkz they're convenient. I'm a techie and I could probably get a job anywhere in the world that techies get jobs.
But liquor laws have nothing to do with it. As far as I can tell Utah is a theocracy, and an insane one at that. They have a porn czar, for God's sake. And she's a 40-yr-old virgin. In any sane country the woman would either be treated for whatever psychological issues she has or left to resolve them on her own. She wouldn't be given a government mandate to crack down on pornography.
Not that any sane countries exist, as far as I can tell.
yr argument is ideological in nature. in a Free Society, this would be true; ergo this is what we should do. like most ideological, didactic arguments, it totally fails to notice relevant facts:
The United States government has no business telling a creator what they must do with their copyrighted work.
I agree with that, but if you drop the Libertarian dogma for a second, you might notice that the real restrictions of freedom in 2001 come from corporations, not government -- at least in the USA. The RIAA has no business telling me what I can or can't do with music I've paid for and bought. Once I've paid for it, it's mine.
Or don't you believe in property rights?
Microsoft seems a bit like the neurotic who you always knew was a little bit wacky but who suddenly turns out to be absolutely, unequivocally, 100% batshit insane. are you kidding me?? outlaw open source?
I was always a little unsure abt the arguments that source code is "speech" in the sense of the First Amendment's speech protections, but this M$ thing has me a believer. it's a real-life reductio ad absurdum.
this is flat-out the most lunatic argument I've ever seen emerge from the business world, and I own books by Peter Drucker.