how can it introduce more (qualified) STEM people into the market?
The answer to this is simple: Pay more to qualified STEM people.
But of course, we all know that the real questions is actually:
how can it introduce more (qualified) STEM people into the market while keeping the price just as low?
That, would require artificially flooding the market with oversupply, but luring qualified people with false promises through continuous propaganda of "STEM shortages".
Consequently, we have a lot of geeky straight-A's teachers (mostly female) who are unable to handle the rougher kids.
Disclaimer: I'm a Finnish teacher, having taken a longer, more hands-on route into the career, but I still find myself a bit too geeky for the worst cases.
But why would you think someone with not-as-good academic credentials will fare any better?
In my experience when I was in school, the best teachers I have encountered were always passionate about the subject they teach. You rarely get people passionate about a subject they are bad at.
Yes, they may not be very well equipped to deal with kids who don't want to learn, but on the balance, it would be better to let down kids who don't want to learn by a teacher good at the subject but at handling rough kids, than to let down kids who DO want to learn by a teacher good at handling rough kids but bad at the subject.
If you have never experienced the clear, exacting system of thought in physics, mathematics or chemistry, you will always be an IDIOT who can be sold ANYTHING. You will be completely at the mercy of the person selling you some shit or some truth or a mix of both.
Unfortunately, that exacting system of thought is beyond the capability of most of the general populace (including most students still in school). So we are all doomed.
If this translated to, say, a hundred sales on iTunes, well it'd be somethng.
For all the ridicule/.ers like to heap on Apple fans, at least those Apple fans are usually willing to pay for stuff.
The amount of money I spend on iTunes for content is comparable to the money I paid for Apple hardware, and is already way more than what I had ever spent on CD/DVD/etc combined.
As a BF4 player, I would rather they focus on gameplay related issues (rubberbanding, etc), rather than spending a huge effort on getting the last 180 pixels on the screen.
Sure, it's nice to have 1080p resolution, but it's worthless if the game isn't fun. If the game is fun at 900px, who cares about that last 180px.
banks should not be free to decide who they can do business with. If a baker cant decide they dont want to do business with a couple they disagree with, a bank should not be able to do so either.
It cut both ways.
Are you saying that banks should also NOT refuse to open accounts directly for terrorist organisations, drug lords, government of Iran, and North Korea?
How about their representatives? Or known associates? Or some front business that don't seems to do transactions like the business they claimed to be, but more like they are just a front for the drug lords?
How about just some normal foreign rich people (e.g. from the US, or China) who had no other business in that country (e.g. Switzerland) but wanting to put millions of dollars (in cash) into the account? BTW, through a company registered somewhere else (e.g. some country in South America)?
How about some no so rich foreign people doing the same for just a few hundred thousand dollars?
How about some random business (e.g. Mega) that the US government just told you not to (or else your bank's will feel their pressure... *hint* *hint*)?
Yes, it is a slippery slope. So, where do you draw the line?
China can ask for the source, but I don't see any US firm agreeing.
Sure, that automatically disqualifies them from selling to any China banks, which means all the money that would have gone to foreign software companies now go to local Chinese software companies, thus kickstarting their growth and eventually they will grow big enough to compete outside of China.
It would not surprise me if that was the real goal here.
Isn't Android being "open" supposedly one of its major strength? Now someone came and actually try to make use of it "openness" and they are now a "rogue" company?
Do your company also do real life security "fire drills," supported by executive management should be conducted regularly in organizations, in order to understand the appropriate course of action in advance of a physical security breach. This includes recovering evidence, identifying and resolving the root cause of the incident (not just the symptoms), and undertaking a forensic investigation?
No? Then perhaps you don't need to do IT security fire drills for the same reason.
You know what could completely stop identity theft? Holding banks responsible for the loss when they were tricked by some thief pretending to their customers. You will see them tightening their authentication and fraud detection overnight.
You know why some countries don't have any identity theft at all? They held banks and companies responsible when they were defrauded, and won't let them pass the loss to their customers by claiming "identity theft".
Now this might come as a surprise to some of the technokids out there - but some of us actually *like* driving and don't want a computer doing it for us.
Then, in the future you described, you may continue to do so in "driving parks" dedicated for human driving or some restricted area where human driving is specially allowed. I.e. much like what you have to do now to enjoy riding your horse around.
I'm not sure why banks don't, but Craigslist already blocks almost all Tor nodes--despite its comparatively meager resources (vs. banks')...
Simply because the banks are not responsible for the losses?
The summary said "nearly $24 million in bank account takeovers by hackers", see? The banks simply pass the loss to their customers by calling it identity theft! Hey, you account has been taken over by hackers! Your loss.
In countries where the banks themselves are responsible for these losses (they called these, rightly, fraud against the bank), you see banks taking measures to stop these thefts. In the US, the banks simply don't care.
I played it on a console, guess that's why I have basically no problem (only had once lost all sound effects during a massive fight) and didn't know about any of the DRM problems.
I got the game and played it for some 30-40 hours now, certainly did see any "fundamentally different approach" in the gameplay so far, compared to, say Kingdoms of Amalur, or Farcry 3, or the Fallout series, etc.
Not the say the game isn't fun, but not really groundbreaking either.
Stupid features and interface changes no one wants are landing in the code and bugs from real users go unresolved.
Because that's how large corporation lead by non-tech management works. Two developers, one said "I added a new feature X", the other said "I fixed Y number of bugs", guess which one got more bonus? Guess what would developers flock to do after that?
I don't understand why publishers are so interested in preorders.
Perhaps because of the huge logistics advantage and cost efficiency of fulfilling preorders compared to normal orders?
With preorders, you knew exactly how many boxes you need to make, and where to deliver them to, and exactly how much revenue you are going to get. That's basically pure profit.
Compared to guesstimating the how much you will sell through retail, and guesstimating how many to send to which retailer, and how many each one might sell, and worrying if the game would be a dud and the boxes would go to landfill, while also worrying if the game would be too big a hit and you can't make them fast enough... preorders is a logistics heaven!
So, if you were a game publisher, wouldn't you try to get people to preorder?
If you're relying on the MTA to keep your email communications secure, you're doing it wrong. If data is important enough to encrypt, encrypt it at the sender side first.
That's the point of using DMCA, it didn't require "doing it right". Even if ROT13 was used, DMCA still applies.
Its always interesting to read articles that challenge the accepted wisdom
Accepted only by the wishful thinkers.
People who get stuff done, instead of just talking about it, knew all along that "positive thinking" is just junk believed by wishful thinkers who come along to take credit for the work.
Slashdot Mirror
how can it introduce more (qualified) STEM people into the market?
The answer to this is simple: Pay more to qualified STEM people.
But of course, we all know that the real questions is actually:
how can it introduce more (qualified) STEM people into the market while keeping the price just as low?
That, would require artificially flooding the market with oversupply, but luring qualified people with false promises through continuous propaganda of "STEM shortages".
Consequently, we have a lot of geeky straight-A's teachers (mostly female) who are unable to handle the rougher kids.
Disclaimer: I'm a Finnish teacher, having taken a longer, more hands-on route into the career, but I still find myself a bit too geeky for the worst cases.
But why would you think someone with not-as-good academic credentials will fare any better?
In my experience when I was in school, the best teachers I have encountered were always passionate about the subject they teach. You rarely get people passionate about a subject they are bad at.
Yes, they may not be very well equipped to deal with kids who don't want to learn, but on the balance, it would be better to let down kids who don't want to learn by a teacher good at the subject but at handling rough kids, than to let down kids who DO want to learn by a teacher good at handling rough kids but bad at the subject.
If you have never experienced the clear, exacting system of thought in physics, mathematics or chemistry, you will always be an IDIOT who can be sold ANYTHING. You will be completely at the mercy of the person selling you some shit or some truth or a mix of both.
Unfortunately, that exacting system of thought is beyond the capability of most of the general populace (including most students still in school). So we are all doomed.
If this translated to, say, a hundred sales on iTunes, well it'd be somethng.
For all the ridicule /.ers like to heap on Apple fans, at least those Apple fans are usually willing to pay for stuff.
The amount of money I spend on iTunes for content is comparable to the money I paid for Apple hardware, and is already way more than what I had ever spent on CD/DVD/etc combined.
In this case wouldn't the clone be more valuable, since it actually has the blood of an other quarter horse running through it?
Obviously, logical thinking is unacceptable when one's income is threatened by it.
As a BF4 player, I would rather they focus on gameplay related issues (rubberbanding, etc), rather than spending a huge effort on getting the last 180 pixels on the screen.
Sure, it's nice to have 1080p resolution, but it's worthless if the game isn't fun. If the game is fun at 900px, who cares about that last 180px.
banks should not be free to decide who they can do business with. If a baker cant decide they dont want to do business with a couple they disagree with, a bank should not be able to do so either.
It cut both ways.
Are you saying that banks should also NOT refuse to open accounts directly for terrorist organisations, drug lords, government of Iran, and North Korea?
How about their representatives? Or known associates? Or some front business that don't seems to do transactions like the business they claimed to be, but more like they are just a front for the drug lords?
How about just some normal foreign rich people (e.g. from the US, or China) who had no other business in that country (e.g. Switzerland) but wanting to put millions of dollars (in cash) into the account? BTW, through a company registered somewhere else (e.g. some country in South America)?
How about some no so rich foreign people doing the same for just a few hundred thousand dollars?
How about some random business (e.g. Mega) that the US government just told you not to (or else your bank's will feel their pressure... *hint* *hint*)?
Yes, it is a slippery slope. So, where do you draw the line?
China can ask for the source, but I don't see any US firm agreeing.
Sure, that automatically disqualifies them from selling to any China banks, which means all the money that would have gone to foreign software companies now go to local Chinese software companies, thus kickstarting their growth and eventually they will grow big enough to compete outside of China.
It would not surprise me if that was the real goal here.
That's the first thing that came to my mind also.
Isn't Android being "open" supposedly one of its major strength? Now someone came and actually try to make use of it "openness" and they are now a "rogue" company?
Perhaps the most dramatic of these paradoxes comes from the idea that the universe must be expanding. [...] yet nobody knows how this can occur.
Since when did "paradox" became a synonym for "unknown"?
Yeah, nobody knows how space expands, but how does that make it a "paradox"?
Do your company also do real life security "fire drills," supported by executive management should be conducted regularly in organizations, in order to understand the appropriate course of action in advance of a physical security breach. This includes recovering evidence, identifying and resolving the root cause of the incident (not just the symptoms), and undertaking a forensic investigation?
No? Then perhaps you don't need to do IT security fire drills for the same reason.
You know what could completely stop identity theft? Holding banks responsible for the loss when they were tricked by some thief pretending to their customers. You will see them tightening their authentication and fraud detection overnight.
You know why some countries don't have any identity theft at all? They held banks and companies responsible when they were defrauded, and won't let them pass the loss to their customers by claiming "identity theft".
Now this might come as a surprise to some of the technokids out there - but some of us actually *like* driving and don't want a computer doing it for us.
Then, in the future you described, you may continue to do so in "driving parks" dedicated for human driving or some restricted area where human driving is specially allowed. I.e. much like what you have to do now to enjoy riding your horse around.
I'm not sure why banks don't, but Craigslist already blocks almost all Tor nodes--despite its comparatively meager resources (vs. banks')...
Simply because the banks are not responsible for the losses?
The summary said "nearly $24 million in bank account takeovers by hackers", see? The banks simply pass the loss to their customers by calling it identity theft! Hey, you account has been taken over by hackers! Your loss.
In countries where the banks themselves are responsible for these losses (they called these, rightly, fraud against the bank), you see banks taking measures to stop these thefts. In the US, the banks simply don't care.
I played it on a console, guess that's why I have basically no problem (only had once lost all sound effects during a massive fight) and didn't know about any of the DRM problems.
Correct, I missed the "not" in the most important part of the post. *sigh*
It certainly reads like one.
I got the game and played it for some 30-40 hours now, certainly did see any "fundamentally different approach" in the gameplay so far, compared to, say Kingdoms of Amalur, or Farcry 3, or the Fallout series, etc.
Not the say the game isn't fun, but not really groundbreaking either.
Stupid features and interface changes no one wants are landing in the code and bugs from real users go unresolved.
Because that's how large corporation lead by non-tech management works. Two developers, one said "I added a new feature X", the other said "I fixed Y number of bugs", guess which one got more bonus? Guess what would developers flock to do after that?
I don't understand why publishers are so interested in preorders.
Perhaps because of the huge logistics advantage and cost efficiency of fulfilling preorders compared to normal orders?
With preorders, you knew exactly how many boxes you need to make, and where to deliver them to, and exactly how much revenue you are going to get. That's basically pure profit.
Compared to guesstimating the how much you will sell through retail, and guesstimating how many to send to which retailer, and how many each one might sell, and worrying if the game would be a dud and the boxes would go to landfill, while also worrying if the game would be too big a hit and you can't make them fast enough... preorders is a logistics heaven!
So, if you were a game publisher, wouldn't you try to get people to preorder?
Far easier solution than announcing lay-offs.
Exactly what I thought also.
If you're relying on the MTA to keep your email communications secure, you're doing it wrong. If data is important enough to encrypt, encrypt it at the sender side first.
That's the point of using DMCA, it didn't require "doing it right". Even if ROT13 was used, DMCA still applies.
And just to pick a nit a bit:
"Unclassifiable" is pure nonsense.
This was written by a journalist. What could you expect?
Its always interesting to read articles that challenge the accepted wisdom
Accepted only by the wishful thinkers.
People who get stuff done, instead of just talking about it, knew all along that "positive thinking" is just junk believed by wishful thinkers who come along to take credit for the work.
+1 Insightful
If a company really wanted their workers to do X, then the company damn well better have the incentive in place to reward X being done.
But no, they don't want to spend a dime more, but just want more work out of their workers.
Seriously, starting to experiment with uncertain approaches in a time of crisis is about the most stupid thing that can be done.
But that is "doing something"! Haven't you heard of the First Rule of Bad Decision Making yet?
1. "We must do something!"
2. "Here is something."
3. "Let's do it!"
During a "crisis", doing nothing or doing things the same way you do normally (for whatever reason), is a mortal sin in the eyes of many PHB types.