In my case, I choose not to work in my specialisation area (computer architecture). Many companies in Holland keep communicating: we want engineers. They even threaten to stop research here publicly... but they don't want engineers. They are firing them at this moment.
Somehow it isn't rewarded that I can do something very well. Not only is it unsexy, nor does it pay. So I won't. Instead I'll try a profession that does not require my best energy but will pay money. Studying electrical engineering was fun but here it ends mostly. I want to be where the money is. Money means you are valued, literally (yes I know this is different for many/. readers).
The way I see it: if profession is a direct enabler to selling then you profit, elsif profession really sucks then you profit, else you lose. The fact that lawyers and economists make more is enough for me (don't start the lame remarks about those professions).
Re:Non-American users are redirected
on
HotBot Returns
·
· Score: 1
that is funny, I live in the Netherlands and get no such thing. I'm directed to hotbot.com
you think they are not the same. They are. Not in your book, but they are in the marketing book. If you have the nerve, pick up a book a la "introduction to marketing".
I don't mind debians installer, but when my XF86Config-4 is wrong and it won't let me into linux anymore... i stop losing faith. Being Linux savvy doesn't mean knowing every file in/etc by hart. It's like expecting everyone to be a good lisp hacker if they want to use emacs: not the way to go.
In reality one thing will happen. Both parties will defend theirselves and the best defence is offence.
You hereby have a circle of violence that is inescapable. The US fights it's war (with planes) and the [group] fights their war [guerilla/terrorist]. If you don't end this circle and decrease that violence some way you end up being unhappy. Killing won't make 'm go away unless you commit genocide (please don't).
So the goal should be to create a situation that is sustainable for both countries/regions. At some point this feeling should be mutual.
I agree that analog can be voodoo involving lotsa math. However when I think of digital, I think computer engineering. Caches, branch prediction, compilers are voodoo too.
Since this discussion is going nowhere, lets be specific:
> The latency issue just isn't an issue with the
Name me a processor that is high end and it will have a latency problem. If you say that isn't true you haven't designed or thought about architectures. Besides that all designs are aware of it and try to hide latency problems. Designs would be _drastically_ different without latency problems.
>Cache size though, is much more important, as a larger cache can hold many queued instructions and data, which will be fed in a constant stream to the processor without having to revert to slower memory.
You just defined cache and it's importance, but not why it's size is important. More is not better. More is a choice with it's drawbacks. I take your point on how this processor would often be used (databases).
>Waiting two or three cycles for data on a P4 could cause major pipeline hiccups.
But since 2 stages in a P4 are equivalent to 1 stage in an Athlon what is the difference? (P4 has 20 stage, athlon has 10 stage i think).
don't lie. Latency problems are totally program dependant. You can't cache new data...
The L2 cache of the P4 probably has a # cycles latency, but I don't think it is a problem. In fact it could be a reason to implement extreme pipelining (so you can make 'small' steps towards computing the result instead of only being able to take big steps). Waiting for main memory _is_ a problem, _BIG_ problem.
I hate to break it to you all but when a feedback loop isn't working it is called feed-forward. It is known to be more unstable.
Obviously the system the US has doesn't work because there is no space for nuances in the voting process. This works great if the problems are simple. It halts to a grind if complex problems come around. If not all data is around to make a simple decision, irrational decisions are made. Simple group-dynamics...
I usually read a lot of comments to see if I'm not saying things again. Now I don't...
Actually you are asking two questions:
-why am I getting this well rounded education
-what do companies want in employees after they graduate.
Both really differ, but they boil down to the same question: _what_do_you_want_with_your_life_.
I consider a university educated person to be able to think broad, universally broad. How you get the experience in _develloping_ views I don't care but it is definitely not about knowledge only. It is about develloping new knowledge too. About feeling with the real world issues together with problems that are new.
If you are not interested in training your brain in solving new situations, University is not your place. You need training in solving to be able to more effectively do it. This idea that common sense will cut it is old. When you want to do cutting edge technology you need big teams to devellop the technology, economic funding and clients to pay for it.
_The_ thing I learned in university is train myself to devellop an expert view using my qualitative, basic ideas. Being able to see how well my innovations perform on the quantative level (technically, economically, business wise etc).
Slashdot Mirror
many countries have rich people, I think your argument does not hold.
In my case, I choose not to work in my specialisation area (computer architecture). Many companies in Holland keep communicating: we want engineers. They even threaten to stop research here publicly... but they don't want engineers. They are firing them at this moment.
/. readers).
Somehow it isn't rewarded that I can do something very well. Not only is it unsexy, nor does it pay. So I won't. Instead I'll try a profession that does not require my best energy but will pay money. Studying electrical engineering was fun but here it ends mostly. I want to be where the money is. Money means you are valued, literally (yes I know this is different for many
The way I see it: if profession is a direct enabler to selling then you profit, elsif profession really sucks then you profit, else you lose. The fact that lawyers and economists make more is enough for me (don't start the lame remarks about those professions).
that is funny, I live in the Netherlands and get no such thing. I'm directed to hotbot.com
I guess your new card gives your name and a google string with all "your hits" eh?
Good Idea
Maybe Google could sell this.
since every time I hit the link, it ends up dead.
I don't want to register to the NYT, period.
There will be content. The question is who pays for it.
This would have been a good comment. However, people do not care about quality if it's free. DiVX and MP3 files are often of poor quality.
that 'll be the end of mailinglists...
you think they are not the same. They are. Not in your book, but they are in the marketing book. If you have the nerve, pick up a book a la "introduction to marketing".
You probably don't have a background either eh? :-)
of course, there is a reason that that box is in the basement. It does not go down.
I don't mind debians installer, but when my XF86Config-4 is wrong and it won't let me into linux anymore... i stop losing faith. Being Linux savvy doesn't mean knowing every file in /etc by hart. It's like expecting everyone to be a good lisp hacker if they want to use emacs: not the way to go.
I guess you can use the same techniques used for re-entry vehicles. I believe dodging a laser is much more effective though.
this is about the most insightfull post, and it isn't moderated?
Yes, I still don't have my fixed font fixed...
Because it is insightful.
In reality one thing will happen. Both parties will defend theirselves and the best defence is offence.
You hereby have a circle of violence that is inescapable. The US fights it's war (with planes) and the [group] fights their war [guerilla/terrorist]. If you don't end this circle and decrease that violence some way you end up being unhappy. Killing won't make 'm go away unless you commit genocide (please don't).
So the goal should be to create a situation that is sustainable for both countries/regions. At some point this feeling should be mutual.
don't forget the wall you put around Cuba.
I agree that analog can be voodoo involving lotsa math. However when I think of digital, I think computer engineering. Caches, branch prediction, compilers are voodoo too.
Since this discussion is going nowhere, lets be specific:
> The latency issue just isn't an issue with the
Name me a processor that is high end and it will have a latency problem. If you say that isn't true you haven't designed or thought about architectures. Besides that all designs are aware of it and try to hide latency problems. Designs would be _drastically_ different without latency problems.
>Cache size though, is much more important, as a larger cache can hold many queued instructions and data, which will be fed in a constant stream to the processor without having to revert to slower memory.
You just defined cache and it's importance, but not why it's size is important. More is not better. More is a choice with it's drawbacks. I take your point on how this processor would often be used (databases).
>Waiting two or three cycles for data on a P4 could cause major pipeline hiccups.
But since 2 stages in a P4 are equivalent to 1 stage in an Athlon what is the difference? (P4 has 20 stage, athlon has 10 stage i think).
don't lie. Latency problems are totally program dependant. You can't cache new data ...
The L2 cache of the P4 probably has a # cycles latency, but I don't think it is a problem. In fact it could be a reason to implement extreme pipelining (so you can make 'small' steps towards computing the result instead of only being able to take big steps). Waiting for main memory _is_ a problem, _BIG_ problem.
I really wonder where you get your ideas.
>At least 99% of time spent editing programs is entering new text, reading text, and deleting/substituting text manually
Because I hated typing things like 00010 00011 00100 sequences I made my own functions like (my-insert-number). But it isn't limited to that.
I hate to break it to you all but when a feedback loop isn't working it is called feed-forward. It is known to be more unstable.
Obviously the system the US has doesn't work because there is no space for nuances in the voting process. This works great if the problems are simple. It halts to a grind if complex problems come around. If not all data is around to make a simple decision, irrational decisions are made. Simple group-dynamics...
Yes, but you have to use electrical engineers & software engineers to make them hit the target.
Political Engineers generally screw things up.
I usually read a lot of comments to see if I'm not saying things again. Now I don't...
Actually you are asking two questions:
-why am I getting this well rounded education
-what do companies want in employees after they graduate.
Both really differ, but they boil down to the same question: _what_do_you_want_with_your_life_.
I consider a university educated person to be able to think broad, universally broad. How you get the experience in _develloping_ views I don't care but it is definitely not about knowledge only. It is about develloping new knowledge too. About feeling with the real world issues together with problems that are new.
If you are not interested in training your brain in solving new situations, University is not your place. You need training in solving to be able to more effectively do it. This idea that common sense will cut it is old. When you want to do cutting edge technology you need big teams to devellop the technology, economic funding and clients to pay for it.
_The_ thing I learned in university is train myself to devellop an expert view using my qualitative, basic ideas. Being able to see how well my innovations perform on the quantative level (technically, economically, business wise etc).
Good luck...