My point was (and has been repeated many times now), the kneejerk "they make biowarfare munitions" posts were wrong.
But again, how do you know? And even if they don't now, maybe they did?
Again, at my facility there's been several cases where remains of old chemical weapon experiments from the 50s have been dug up in the back 40, even AFTER the supposed site-wide clean-up initiative.
And it's basically been a communications research facility only for decades.
Again, I'm not saying there's a conspiracy, but you can't assume that: a) there isn't b) there never was
Guess what anthrax is?? A _cow_ disease. I work at a government research lab in Canada, and I they had pictures from our lab out west where they were studying a cow that died of anthrax.
I'm not saying there's a conspiracy, but watch the assumptions you make. Or you may be coming down with avian flu sometime soon.:)
Could that be because there IS reason for concern? Isn't that exactly what this article is saying?
What IS concerning is that engineers are allowed to go on strike at a mission-critical facility. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't be allowed in Canada, from what I remember from Professional Practice class. Hell, we can be denied bereavement leave if lives are in danger. And we have no minimum wage.
Fact: servers running OpenBSD, which claims to focus on security, are frequently compromised. According to Jim Markham, editor of the online security forum SecurityWatch, the few OpenBSD servers that exist on the internet have become a joke among the hacker community. "They make a game out of it," he says. "(OpenBSD leader) Theo [de Raadt] will scramble to make a new patch to fix one problem, and they've already compromised a bunch of boxes with a different exploit."
Your search - "bunch of boxes with a different exploit" - did not match any documents.
I am talking about a completely new way of programming, equivalent in result to imperative programming, but also proovable.
It may not be possible, but has anyone thought about it? proved that it can't or can be done?
Think about what you just said. Has anyone proved that you can prove a program? Do you understand the recursion there? That's why this problem is so hard, and why it's such an extensively researched topic. In general any tool you use to prove the correctness of a program has to be at least as powerful as the compiler/code you're proving, and therefore just as complicated to prove. Game over.
Well if I understand it correctly a TV is digital, even the oldest ones. The screens are made up of lines which I have also understood are made up of dots so VHS and DVD are both lesser than film would be my argument!
The screen is divided up into horizontal lines, yes, but there are no 'dots' - each line is controlled by an analog signal. In theory analog TVs could have an infinitely precise signal horizontally (which is why you only ever hear about one number when it comes to TV resolutions - number of scan lines). In practice a broadcast TV signal has to fit into 6 MHz, so the bandwidth limits how fast the signal can change, and therefore how much horizontal resolution you have. And because the parts and standards in TVs were designed with this bandwidth in mind, you probably can't pump much more than that in, even with a high quality source. But it is most definitely not digital. There are no 'dots' or 'pixels'. Which is one of the reasons different grades of TVs can look so different.
As for projected film, I like it as well, except for one major, glaring problem - frame rate. Watch any film as they pan, and tell me you don't see blurring (unless it's very slow/from very far away). This is the REAL reason action scenes are generally in slow motion. Because fast motion just gets blurred out. It's awful. People have to shoot around the limitations of the medium. And as I mentioned, the reels would just be huge if they tried to do anything about it.
Did you see 28 Days Later? A lot of that was shot on MiniDV for the look, and it looked awesome in the theatre. There's no look that film can give you that FinalCut Pro or whatever can't duplicate. There's even mp3 player plugins that will put the vinyl hiss back into your digital files.
Your signal processing can't be that complicated if you're more worried about it's speed than getting it clear and right, which is 8000x times easier in a high-level language (or even MATLAB), because you can write the algorithm like it looks on paper.
I believe your still throwing out a lot of the relevant information (how ironic!). Notice that not only is the visible resolution comparable up to 13x19, but digital does NOT have the noise and graininess that analog has, and is therefore arguably of BETTER QUALITY.
Now some coding theory for you. Yes, digital does involve a certian, small, upper-bounded amount of quantization error. This is a known quantity, and is generally fixed below the limits of human perception.
Analog, on the other hand, has random noise, chemical behaviour, etc, etc to contend with. And there's no way to eliminate it once it's there. Where's with digital you can do all sorts of fancy noise filtering and cancellation.
Also note that digital photos are going to archive much, much better. Film deterioates. Bits can be backed up.
Take audio, sound is analog for all practical purposes and any digital representation will have lost some of the originals quality.
Yes, digital will have lost of a fixed amount of quality. BUT, analog will lose a unknown amount of quantity, and continue to lose unknown amounts of quality over the life of the medium, depending on what temperature it's played at, etc., etc. Analog may be slightly more accurate, but it's nowhere near as precise.
Also note that the fact that there ARE larger formats of film, implicitly admits there are resolution limits to each size.
As for projecting film, if you've ever looked at an IMAX setup you'll see how unwieldy it is to increase the size. And you still have jitter, reel changes, etc., etc. And every time you increase the frame rate (which we sorely need), the reels will just get bigger. Not so with digital.
Analog is not automatically superior. That's why no one ever claims that VHS has a better picture than DVD.
Check this out, for one. It even has links back here for more discussion.
I _am_ suggesting newspaper is printed with dots. I'm also suggesting at some level any analog film is going to look blurry/spotty/grainy if you blow it up. It's not actually as continuous as the real world. It's just not chemically possible.
And I never made a black and white generalization that digital is better than analog, but it sounds like you're trying to do the opposite. I said for large values of megapixels, digital is starting to eclipse analog quality (which it does, in most cases).
To wit: "If you want to make archival prints up to 13x19 inches (as large as 99% of people will ever want), a good 35mm Digital SLR will outperform film." (from above article)
I believe the editing is usually done with digital scans now, and then the actual analog film is put together when they know what bits they want to use.
It's worth nothing that when the story about the digital vs. analog Episode II screenings came up last year on slashdot, there was a very different story. I wish I had the link.
Basically they showed the two pictures side by side. The one picture shook a little at the beginning, and everyone was like "ahh, that's analog". And most of them said it looked better.
Turns out someone just bumped the digital projector. And that the digital projection looked better, not least of which because it didn't darken towards the edges, like analog projection.
Also digital cameras (in the 20 megapixel range) are now officially surpassing analog 35 mm quality. Ask a photo geek. They'll tell you the same thing.
Analog has resolution problems too. It's not like it's vector based or something. It's a chemical processed with resolution limits. Take a look at your average newspaper photo...it's analog, but low-res.
You could also argue that people are just downloading what's available right now (because it's new or popular), and that not necessarily what they want to watch. I know a lot of people that just grab whatever torrents are hot.
If I could choose what movie I wanted from the last 30 years, obscure or no, I'd be willing to pay, and would watch it.
I actually once had to transfer someone's old drive to their two, brand new, 13.8 GB drives (largest available at the time). I was using good old xcopy on a windows 9x box, and the long file names were slowing it down to all hell, and it basically was taking the whole day to transfer.
The guy kept coming back all frantic about how he needed this system back for 'his business', etc, etc.
Meanwhile I'm watching the directory names scroll by and by...and each one is the name of a different girl.
At least he was on organized mofo. Unlike the people who would bring their systems in with porn.zips completely covering the desktop.
Sheesh. You're probably the same guy who got fired from a tech job for having no people skills, because you didn't think they were important.
Having been a BBS kid back in the day, there's plenty of people who wasted more of their life than those on the 'inside', but everyone recognized as fucking idiots. Those with better access were almost invariably those who also had friends/connections in real life, (or sometimes just money for the lastest, fastest modem...but rich kids also tend to have better things to do with their time), and had better social skills. And only used the '1337 speak' for humorous effect.
e.g. I knew that the '1911' in Razor 1911 was 777 in hex, but just because it was funny and we were bored with our base converter in computer class.
It's analogous to how the best metal bands are the ones who thing all the satanic shit is just a hilarious lark and do it over the top, not the ones who take it seriously.
This is also probably why I had to go through tighter security on my recent tour of a Bell central office than I did going on a tour of a National Defense facility. The trick is getting access to a core router in the first place.
The one people want is going to be the "official" version in May, I think.
But that release will be no different if no one WANTS to test this one. It's one thing about whining about waiting for something you don't want to code on or patch, it's another when you don't even want to put in the time to report bugs.
The article says mozilla's new mail notification is audio only. I am using thunderbird on windows, and it often pop's up a little message in the bottom right of the screen.
ONLY on windows, sadly. The audio doesn't even work for me on linux any more.
You're describing a travelling EM wave, which is a special case of paired electric and magnetic fields.
Moving electric charge creates a magnetic field, whereas moving magnetic charge creates an electric field. Therefore alternating current creates a magnetic field, whereas you can use a magnet to create an alternating current.
I think it pretty much is impossible in RTS, in a client-client model, at least.
Then change the client-client model, is the more research you can do.
If you still wanted to stay with a two person model you could send your data to a third party playing the same game, who would verify your data, and you would verify theirs. And you could massively distribute this.
One thought would be to be if one person accused you of cheating, you'd have to get your data verified by more people around the country, etc, etc, so you couldn't say just one person had a vendetta against.
This is a solvable problem. You just have to get past the old "playing across town over the modem" model.
This is incorrect: read up on information theory. The maximum capacity of a communication channel is directly related to the bandwidth of the channel. Hence bandwidth is commonly used to refer to the capacity of the channel. It is in no way a gross generalisation.
The AC who responded is correct. Also don't forget that with infinite SNR you can transmit infinite information per unit time (just picture a AM signal with infinite possible levels).
Also look at what has been done with phone lines (both within the traditional bandwidth and above it).
However when people are talking about moving bits around over an abstract physical layer, rather than signals on the physical layer, I agree that bandwidth and capacity are pretty much interchangeable. It all depends on the unit, if you give bandwidth to me in bps, it means one thing, and in Hz, it means another.
...Look, how fast will the thing go, and will I end up starting a fire in my PC from overheat?
I note that this is a joke, but one of the many advantages of shooting light around in fiber/silicon is that it doesn't create nearly as much waste heat as trying to ram electrons through. That's the really exciting part, no more heat limit on processors.
Not that they've shown that they could build processors with optical inside them yet, but the whole point is that the processor won't need to be localized any more. Ekkkkkkssssellent. Aren't I glad I'm about to finish a Communications Systems Engineering degree? Oh yes. Yes indeed.
It's not THAT cold. And the indie rock scene is pretty lively, if that's your thing.
The male/female ratio is above 1:1 (which is only true at two schools in Ontario), but not by much. I wouldn't say 'very high', certainly.
If you care about women that much, do environmental engineering. It's the only engineering program with a consistently higher number of females than males.
Easy to get into, hard to get out of.:) It's actually improving dramatically, especially in their new, 'marquee' programs. Comm Eng and Engineering Physics ain't no cake walk. And you need high 80s to even get into them.
I'm just about finished Communications Engineering at Carleton University. If it's really a professional engineering design degree that you're after, and not somethign with more of a technological slant, it's definitely the way to go. It was the first Comm Eng program in Canada (I'm in the third batch to graduate this year), and there's a strong batch of professors in the field. It also helps that Ottawa is 'Silicon Valley North'. Nortel headquarters is here, and various Alcatel and JDS plants, etc. Not to mention all the local start-ups.
We cover everything from distributed network programming, to coding techniques, to circuit design, to protocol implementation, to allocating resources for quality of service. It's great, once you get past all the math and science at the beginning. Introduction to Communications Software was my favourite course ever.
Were your options milk cows and live in poverty or take loans and go to school?
Aren't those everyone's options? If you just replaced "milk cows" with "minimum wage", anyway. I took some loans first and second year to go to school, yes, but I also took a Co-op program so I could work real jobs in the summer and not be a slave to them. I'll be graduating this year with about $4000 CDN in loans, and 24 months of actual job experience that I can use to help get a job. Not to mention all the extra-curricular stuff I did in school to make friends/contacts. Oh, and I'm working two jobs this semester, as well as taking four courses and my 4th year project. Oh, and I worked my ass off (maintained an A-) to keep my partial scholarship all the way through.
The point is no one owes you shit. You had the chance to go out and prove yourself. Maybe you got a raw deal, maybe you didn't, but the point is you had several years of school and work to make good impressions on people. Which is something more than just doing your job competently.
When I was in second year people even semi-competent engineers were bragging about their competing job offers. Now I'll be happy to get in a low-paid research position in the government. But I'm not going to complain about it. I knew the tech bubble would burst. But I got into it because I love it, not because I wanted a sure job. Go get HVAC training or a trade if you want a sure, well-paying job.
Slashdot Mirror
My point was (and has been repeated many times now), the kneejerk "they make biowarfare munitions" posts were wrong.
But again, how do you know? And even if they don't now, maybe they did?
Again, at my facility there's been several cases where remains of old chemical weapon experiments from the 50s have been dug up in the back 40, even AFTER the supposed site-wide clean-up initiative.
And it's basically been a communications research facility only for decades.
Again, I'm not saying there's a conspiracy, but you can't assume that:
a) there isn't
b) there never was
Agriculture, not human disease.
:)
Guess what anthrax is?? A _cow_ disease. I work at a government research lab in Canada, and I they had pictures from our lab out west where they were studying a cow that died of anthrax.
I'm not saying there's a conspiracy, but watch the assumptions you make. Or you may be coming down with avian flu sometime soon.
Could that be because there IS reason for concern? Isn't that exactly what this article is saying?
What IS concerning is that engineers are allowed to go on strike at a mission-critical facility. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't be allowed in Canada, from what I remember from Professional Practice class. Hell, we can be denied bereavement leave if lives are in danger. And we have no minimum wage.
But clearly the facts state otherwise:
Fact: servers running OpenBSD, which claims to focus on security, are frequently compromised. According to Jim Markham, editor of the online security forum SecurityWatch, the few OpenBSD servers that exist on the internet have become a joke among the hacker community. "They make a game out of it," he says. "(OpenBSD leader) Theo [de Raadt] will scramble to make a new patch to fix one problem, and they've already compromised a bunch of boxes with a different exploit."
Your search - "bunch of boxes with a different exploit" - did not match any documents.
What facts? Good work.
I am talking about a completely new way of programming, equivalent in result to imperative programming, but also proovable.
It may not be possible, but has anyone thought about it? proved that it can't or can be done?
Think about what you just said. Has anyone proved that you can prove a program? Do you understand the recursion there? That's why this problem is so hard, and why it's such an extensively researched topic. In general any tool you use to prove the correctness of a program has to be at least as powerful as the compiler/code you're proving, and therefore just as complicated to prove. Game over.
Well if I understand it correctly a TV is digital, even the oldest ones. The screens are made up of lines which I have also understood are made up of dots so VHS and DVD are both lesser than film would be my argument!
The screen is divided up into horizontal lines, yes, but there are no 'dots' - each line is controlled by an analog signal. In theory analog TVs could have an infinitely precise signal horizontally (which is why you only ever hear about one number when it comes to TV resolutions - number of scan lines). In practice a broadcast TV signal has to fit into 6 MHz, so the bandwidth limits how fast the signal can change, and therefore how much horizontal resolution you have. And because the parts and standards in TVs were designed with this bandwidth in mind, you probably can't pump much more than that in, even with a high quality source. But it is most definitely not digital. There are no 'dots' or 'pixels'. Which is one of the reasons different grades of TVs can look so different.
As for projected film, I like it as well, except for one major, glaring problem - frame rate. Watch any film as they pan, and tell me you don't see blurring (unless it's very slow/from very far away). This is the REAL reason action scenes are generally in slow motion. Because fast motion just gets blurred out. It's awful. People have to shoot around the limitations of the medium. And as I mentioned, the reels would just be huge if they tried to do anything about it.
Did you see 28 Days Later? A lot of that was shot on MiniDV for the look, and it looked awesome in the theatre. There's no look that film can give you that FinalCut Pro or whatever can't duplicate. There's even mp3 player plugins that will put the vinyl hiss back into your digital files.
Your signal processing can't be that complicated if you're more worried about it's speed than getting it clear and right, which is 8000x times easier in a high-level language (or even MATLAB), because you can write the algorithm like it looks on paper.
I believe your still throwing out a lot of the relevant information (how ironic!). Notice that not only is the visible resolution comparable up to 13x19, but digital does NOT have the noise and graininess that analog has, and is therefore arguably of BETTER QUALITY.
Now some coding theory for you. Yes, digital does involve a certian, small, upper-bounded amount of quantization error. This is a known quantity, and is generally fixed below the limits of human perception.
Analog, on the other hand, has random noise, chemical behaviour, etc, etc to contend with. And there's no way to eliminate it once it's there. Where's with digital you can do all sorts of fancy noise filtering and cancellation.
Also note that digital photos are going to archive much, much better. Film deterioates. Bits can be backed up.
Take audio, sound is analog for all practical purposes and any digital representation will have lost some of the originals quality.
Yes, digital will have lost of a fixed amount of quality. BUT, analog will lose a unknown amount of quantity, and continue to lose unknown amounts of quality over the life of the medium, depending on what temperature it's played at, etc., etc. Analog may be slightly more accurate, but it's nowhere near as precise.
Also note that the fact that there ARE larger formats of film, implicitly admits there are resolution limits to each size.
As for projecting film, if you've ever looked at an IMAX setup you'll see how unwieldy it is to increase the size. And you still have jitter, reel changes, etc., etc. And every time you increase the frame rate (which we sorely need), the reels will just get bigger. Not so with digital.
Analog is not automatically superior. That's why no one ever claims that VHS has a better picture than DVD.
Check this out, for one. It even has links back here for more discussion.
I _am_ suggesting newspaper is printed with dots. I'm also suggesting at some level any analog film is going to look blurry/spotty/grainy if you blow it up. It's not actually as continuous as the real world. It's just not chemically possible.
And I never made a black and white generalization that digital is better than analog, but it sounds like you're trying to do the opposite. I said for large values of megapixels, digital is starting to eclipse analog quality (which it does, in most cases).
To wit: "If you want to make archival prints up to 13x19 inches (as large as 99% of people will ever want), a good 35mm Digital SLR will outperform film." (from above article)
I believe the editing is usually done with digital scans now, and then the actual analog film is put together when they know what bits they want to use.
It's worth nothing that when the story about the digital vs. analog Episode II screenings came up last year on slashdot, there was a very different story. I wish I had the link.
Basically they showed the two pictures side by side. The one picture shook a little at the beginning, and everyone was like "ahh, that's analog". And most of them said it looked better.
Turns out someone just bumped the digital projector. And that the digital projection looked better, not least of which because it didn't darken towards the edges, like analog projection.
Also digital cameras (in the 20 megapixel range) are now officially surpassing analog 35 mm quality. Ask a photo geek. They'll tell you the same thing.
Analog has resolution problems too. It's not like it's vector based or something. It's a chemical processed with resolution limits. Take a look at your average newspaper photo...it's analog, but low-res.
You could also argue that people are just downloading what's available right now (because it's new or popular), and that not necessarily what they want to watch. I know a lot of people that just grab whatever torrents are hot.
If I could choose what movie I wanted from the last 30 years, obscure or no, I'd be willing to pay, and would watch it.
I actually once had to transfer someone's old drive to their two, brand new, 13.8 GB drives (largest available at the time). I was using good old xcopy on a windows 9x box, and the long file names were slowing it down to all hell, and it basically was taking the whole day to transfer.
.zips completely covering the desktop.
The guy kept coming back all frantic about how he needed this system back for 'his business', etc, etc.
Meanwhile I'm watching the directory names scroll by and by...and each one is the name of a different girl.
At least he was on organized mofo. Unlike the people who would bring their systems in with porn
Sheesh. You're probably the same guy who got fired from a tech job for having no people skills, because you didn't think they were important.
Having been a BBS kid back in the day, there's plenty of people who wasted more of their life than those on the 'inside', but everyone recognized as fucking idiots. Those with better access were almost invariably those who also had friends/connections in real life, (or sometimes just money for the lastest, fastest modem...but rich kids also tend to have better things to do with their time), and had better social skills. And only used the '1337 speak' for humorous effect.
e.g. I knew that the '1911' in Razor 1911 was 777 in hex, but just because it was funny and we were bored with our base converter in computer class.
It's analogous to how the best metal bands are the ones who thing all the satanic shit is just a hilarious lark and do it over the top, not the ones who take it seriously.
This is also probably why I had to go through tighter security on my recent tour of a Bell central office than I did going on a tour of a National Defense facility. The trick is getting access to a core router in the first place.
The one people want is going to be the "official" version in May, I think.
But that release will be no different if no one WANTS to test this one. It's one thing about whining about waiting for something you don't want to code on or patch, it's another when you don't even want to put in the time to report bugs.
The article says mozilla's new mail notification is audio only. I am using thunderbird on windows, and it often pop's up a little message in the bottom right of the screen.
ONLY on windows, sadly. The audio doesn't even work for me on linux any more.
Just to be clear, I haven't even seen ROTK (not out on DVD where I live); I'm speaking generally.
I've heard of not reading the article...but not seeing the movie you're so happy for? That's a whole other level.
You're describing a travelling EM wave, which is a special case of paired electric and magnetic fields.
Moving electric charge creates a magnetic field, whereas moving magnetic charge creates an electric field. Therefore alternating current creates a magnetic field, whereas you can use a magnet to create an alternating current.
I think it pretty much is impossible in RTS, in a client-client model, at least.
Then change the client-client model, is the more research you can do.
If you still wanted to stay with a two person model you could send your data to a third party playing the same game, who would verify your data, and you would verify theirs. And you could massively distribute this.
One thought would be to be if one person accused you of cheating, you'd have to get your data verified by more people around the country, etc, etc, so you couldn't say just one person had a vendetta against.
This is a solvable problem. You just have to get past the old "playing across town over the modem" model.
This is incorrect: read up on information theory. The maximum capacity of a communication channel is directly related to the bandwidth of the channel. Hence bandwidth is commonly used to refer to the capacity of the channel. It is in no way a gross generalisation.
The AC who responded is correct. Also don't forget that with infinite SNR you can transmit infinite information per unit time (just picture a AM signal with infinite possible levels).
Also look at what has been done with phone lines (both within the traditional bandwidth and above it).
However when people are talking about moving bits around over an abstract physical layer, rather than signals on the physical layer, I agree that bandwidth and capacity are pretty much interchangeable. It all depends on the unit, if you give bandwidth to me in bps, it means one thing, and in Hz, it means another.
And let's not get started on baud, either.
...Look, how fast will the thing go, and will I end up starting a fire in my PC from overheat?
I note that this is a joke, but one of the many advantages of shooting light around in fiber/silicon is that it doesn't create nearly as much waste heat as trying to ram electrons through. That's the really exciting part, no more heat limit on processors.
Not that they've shown that they could build processors with optical inside them yet, but the whole point is that the processor won't need to be localized any more. Ekkkkkkssssellent. Aren't I glad I'm about to finish a Communications Systems Engineering degree? Oh yes. Yes indeed.
It's not THAT cold. And the indie rock scene is pretty lively, if that's your thing.
The male/female ratio is above 1:1 (which is only true at two schools in Ontario), but not by much. I wouldn't say 'very high', certainly.
If you care about women that much, do environmental engineering. It's the only engineering program with a consistently higher number of females than males.
Oh, you mean Last Chance U?
:) It's actually improving dramatically, especially in their new, 'marquee' programs. Comm Eng and Engineering Physics ain't no cake walk. And you need high 80s to even get into them.
Easy to get into, hard to get out of.
I'm just about finished Communications Engineering at Carleton University. If it's really a professional engineering design degree that you're after, and not somethign with more of a technological slant, it's definitely the way to go. It was the first Comm Eng program in Canada (I'm in the third batch to graduate this year), and there's a strong batch of professors in the field. It also helps that Ottawa is 'Silicon Valley North'. Nortel headquarters is here, and various Alcatel and JDS plants, etc. Not to mention all the local start-ups.
We cover everything from distributed network programming, to coding techniques, to circuit design, to protocol implementation, to allocating resources for quality of service. It's great, once you get past all the math and science at the beginning. Introduction to Communications Software was my favourite course ever.
Were your options milk cows and live in poverty or take loans and go to school?
Aren't those everyone's options? If you just replaced "milk cows" with "minimum wage", anyway. I took some loans first and second year to go to school, yes, but I also took a Co-op program so I could work real jobs in the summer and not be a slave to them. I'll be graduating this year with about $4000 CDN in loans, and 24 months of actual job experience that I can use to help get a job. Not to mention all the extra-curricular stuff I did in school to make friends/contacts. Oh, and I'm working two jobs this semester, as well as taking four courses and my 4th year project. Oh, and I worked my ass off (maintained an A-) to keep my partial scholarship all the way through.
The point is no one owes you shit. You had the chance to go out and prove yourself. Maybe you got a raw deal, maybe you didn't, but the point is you had several years of school and work to make good impressions on people. Which is something more than just doing your job competently.
When I was in second year people even semi-competent engineers were bragging about their competing job offers. Now I'll be happy to get in a low-paid research position in the government. But I'm not going to complain about it. I knew the tech bubble would burst. But I got into it because I love it, not because I wanted a sure job. Go get HVAC training or a trade if you want a sure, well-paying job.