It doesn't change anything. Money is already the dirtiest thing on Earth. You never know, unless it is a brand new banknote, where the one you are handling has been before being in your hands.
You would starve because you don't charge enough to have a buffer between contracts. So, you throw half your money at an agent that will get about the same money as you for few days of work and you do that since 1992. You must be silly.
The problem is good "agents" are rare as pope shit. You get bad ones and they keep at least 50% of the paycheck for themselves doing almost nothing and not representing you properly because they don't care since they have a list they submit and they don't know the difference between a bit and a byte. So, they cannot really sell you. The good one is only as good as the contacts he has, if you are good his sell pitch is trivial. If he really has the good contacts he is running a consultancy business and you are his consultant. He keeps then more than 50% of the bill at the end.
It seems there is plenty of guys around ready to work on a contractual basis for something around 50-60$/hr. This is the paycheck someone should expect for a permanent position, not a contractual one. You cannot stay in business on the long term with a 50-60$/hr in a developed country.
BTW, it is not about Gnome 3 anyway, it is about the toolkit on which Gnome 3 happens to be based. You probably run some GTK+ based application, even if you use KDE, Unity, XFCE or anything else.
On another hand, anyone here knows an automated car wash that can actually do a great job at washing a car? So far, I haven't find a single one that do the job like a human is doing it. My guess is the business case for an automated car wash capable to wash clean a car is significantly better than any skyscaper window washing robot and we are still waiting for a decent one.
It is not just about the skills, it is also about the innovation and creativity. Confronted to less challenging problems and solutions, someone will be less prone to innovate. At the end, businesses may put themselves in a position they are no longer capable to maintain their leading position in their own market because creativity has been killed for better control of quality and processes.
Yeah, perhaps, but science isn't religion and having hopes and strong beliefs into a replacement model doesn't make it real and valid. The most probable explanation for the bump in data observed at CERN LHC is the Higgs. The techni-higgs is much, much less probable, by many magnitudes of order because it relies on a yet to discover techni-force and so on.
So, unless we have a load of new data we cannot explain with the Standard Model, it is very unlikely this particle is something than Higgs.
Clearly not, SCO Unix has no right on Posix API for first, and SCO Unix isn't the only OS implementing the Posix API. Your question and example is irrelevant.
Well, I doubt we will ever be near a human brain. The number of synpases a single neuron can do is already beyond everything you can imagine, even massively parallel or whatever else. Also, I don't believe the goal is to mimick the human brain anyway. We have no idea how knowledge is represented in a human brain. An our planes do not copy the nature at all, they are inspired by it, but in no way we are near to copy a bird's flight.
There is a danger to let people think we will mimick the human brain while we just don't know and probability is very low it will ever happen, at least in a foreseeable future. AI should concentrate on doing useful stuff, no matter how it is done. Getting results is what will keep AI alive. In the past, it was almost killed by many falsed promises and investors did defect when they realized it will not deliver what they expected from it. Setting expectations right will save AI. Everyone wants to dream about HAL, singularities and all this unrealistic stuff, but please keep your feet on the ground for the stake of the future of AI.
Did I say anything about that? I am just saying these were actually lies. I wasn't presented with the reverse scenario. Of course saying the temperature will naturally go back down is also a lie. What's your point?
So far, I haven't taken position for or against anything. I just observe that these predictions qualifies as lies given the context they are issued. I don't know why you think I am taking position for Inhofe or anything else, you seems strongly bias in your judgement.
I'm sorry, but they are actually lies. If you say your model is correct and its predictions proven wrong you lied. You lied letting people think your model is correct. You lied not making the mandatory statements about the probability of occurence of your prediction. Climate models comes with a responsability.
There was no before. Time was created with the Big Bang. Otherwise you are saying the Big Bang occured in a pre-existing universe, which is not the case. Then you have to ask yourself about this pre-existing universe and how it was created and so on. The before question is pointless.
Flying SpaceShip WhateverNumber is still an Earth bound situation. Until they escape Earth's gravitational field we can consider them bound to the Earth. No judge will rule against that argument after hearing experts.
"One of the great theories of modern cosmology is that the universe began in a "Big Bang", but the mathematical mechanism by which this occurred has been lacking."
WTF is that? A mathematical mechanism by which this occured? I mean, the universe is physical, the mechanism is physical, the mathematics are a description or a model for the physical thing, not the reverse. A mathematical model can describe and be close to the reality, but it can also describe something which doesn't exist at all. Sketching a mathematical model for the Big Bang doesn't mean the model is valid and describe the reality, you need experimental facts, and enough of them, to make sure the model/description is within the boundaries of the reality.
Thanks for the comments. I read another article about this and they left us think it would be suitable to build medical accelerators and small size accelerators for many purposes. Apparently it is not the case.
Actually, it is the accelaration module that is 1 foot long. It is not a collider, it is an accelerator a collider would be at least two feet long and in reality would have more than one acceleration module.
You cannot say that. Nobody knows how the knowledge is represented in brain. You can think of a particular knowledge the other party has never experienced in the past, will this other party able to extract the meaning from such a thing? I doubt greatly it would be the case. The same thing as some words just do not exist at all in some languages because there was never a need for such words and to designed or describe such things.
For now, this experiment is at a very basic level which can be represented in a binary form. Nothing that can be compared to a language and what the written or spoken language enables us to communicate.
Remember, my OP was about what these companies are seeking for: A guy keeping current and running seminars on hot topics all the time in addition to his day job. Keep in mind if you have to run seminars on hot topics, you have to master those hot topics, where do you manage to have the time to master these hot topics elsewhere than your day job and the hours you run and prepare seminars on these hot topics?
If it is not asking someone to dedicated his life entirely to his job I wonder what it is. No families allowed here, forget about kids and $150K/yr is a very bad paycheck for all these hours.
May be right now these most successful companies are able to make this strategy work. I don't believe it will work very long.
Once I am at it, do not forget neither a lawyer and physician will have a career for their lifetime. At the pace these companies are trying to squeeze the juice out of their employees, these will be burnt within 15 years. Then looks who will complain about qualified professionals shortage.
Most paid lawyers are doing commercial and fiscal law and must keep up with the law. In fact, it is somewhat comparable to an high tech job in IT you have to constantly keep up with new stuff. These lawyers are paid way well above 150K$/yr, they are in the range of 500K$/yr and above.
BTW, if the company is looking for candidates offering seminars on hot topics and each company in the town is looking for candidates offering seminars on hot topics I believe this requires a shit-load of seminars on hot topics in the town to run weekly and given the number of seminars on hot topics in town, I guess no one is available to attend seminars on hot topics or willing to pay for seminars on hot topics because too many seminars on hot topics make hot topics cold. How many positions can you fill with people giving seminars on hot topics? How much are you willing to pay for this kind of guy who is supposed to be hot and highly demanded given the hot topics he is giving seminars on?
"For example, some of the most successful companies find their talent through engagement with the technical community, participating in hackathons or offering seminars on hot topics such as Scala and Hadoop. These companies play a long game in order to lodge in the consciousness of the candidates they hope will apply next time they're ready to make a move."
So, you are supposed to work during the day and participate in hackathons during the evening and week ends. These are looking for slaves. I can't believe this is the model someone consider as being successful. Why only in IT this kind of things happen? Do you ask a lawyer to do hackathons? Participate in contests for a slice of pizza and a flat beer? Do IT employees considered people with families, with kids, with a right to do something else not related to computers during the week ends, during the evening? This world is broken.
As a IT prospect, do you respect yourself enough to refuse this kind of slavery?
It isn't a centrifuge for start and a reactor isn't a bomb. Reaching critical mass does not lead to a bomb, it leads to a huge radiation emission. Even if the principles behind the bomb are not that difficult to understand, making one is another matter.
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't change anything. Money is already the dirtiest thing on Earth. You never know, unless it is a brand new banknote, where the one you are handling has been before being in your hands.
You would starve because you don't charge enough to have a buffer between contracts. So, you throw half your money at an agent that will get about the same money as you for few days of work and you do that since 1992. You must be silly.
The problem is good "agents" are rare as pope shit. You get bad ones and they keep at least 50% of the paycheck for themselves doing almost nothing and not representing you properly because they don't care since they have a list they submit and they don't know the difference between a bit and a byte. So, they cannot really sell you. The good one is only as good as the contacts he has, if you are good his sell pitch is trivial. If he really has the good contacts he is running a consultancy business and you are his consultant. He keeps then more than 50% of the bill at the end.
It seems there is plenty of guys around ready to work on a contractual basis for something around 50-60$/hr. This is the paycheck someone should expect for a permanent position, not a contractual one. You cannot stay in business on the long term with a 50-60$/hr in a developed country.
BTW, it is not about Gnome 3 anyway, it is about the toolkit on which Gnome 3 happens to be based. You probably run some GTK+ based application, even if you use KDE, Unity, XFCE or anything else.
Linus Torvalds and I love Gnome 3.
On another hand, anyone here knows an automated car wash that can actually do a great job at washing a car? So far, I haven't find a single one that do the job like a human is doing it. My guess is the business case for an automated car wash capable to wash clean a car is significantly better than any skyscaper window washing robot and we are still waiting for a decent one.
It is not just about the skills, it is also about the innovation and creativity. Confronted to less challenging problems and solutions, someone will be less prone to innovate. At the end, businesses may put themselves in a position they are no longer capable to maintain their leading position in their own market because creativity has been killed for better control of quality and processes.
There is a program on my bug.
Yeah, perhaps, but science isn't religion and having hopes and strong beliefs into a replacement model doesn't make it real and valid. The most probable explanation for the bump in data observed at CERN LHC is the Higgs. The techni-higgs is much, much less probable, by many magnitudes of order because it relies on a yet to discover techni-force and so on.
So, unless we have a load of new data we cannot explain with the Standard Model, it is very unlikely this particle is something than Higgs.
But the guy got his 15 minutes fame.
Clearly not, SCO Unix has no right on Posix API for first, and SCO Unix isn't the only OS implementing the Posix API. Your question and example is irrelevant.
Well, I doubt we will ever be near a human brain. The number of synpases a single neuron can do is already beyond everything you can imagine, even massively parallel or whatever else. Also, I don't believe the goal is to mimick the human brain anyway. We have no idea how knowledge is represented in a human brain. An our planes do not copy the nature at all, they are inspired by it, but in no way we are near to copy a bird's flight.
There is a danger to let people think we will mimick the human brain while we just don't know and probability is very low it will ever happen, at least in a foreseeable future. AI should concentrate on doing useful stuff, no matter how it is done. Getting results is what will keep AI alive. In the past, it was almost killed by many falsed promises and investors did defect when they realized it will not deliver what they expected from it. Setting expectations right will save AI. Everyone wants to dream about HAL, singularities and all this unrealistic stuff, but please keep your feet on the ground for the stake of the future of AI.
Did I say anything about that? I am just saying these were actually lies. I wasn't presented with the reverse scenario. Of course saying the temperature will naturally go back down is also a lie. What's your point?
So far, I haven't taken position for or against anything. I just observe that these predictions qualifies as lies given the context they are issued. I don't know why you think I am taking position for Inhofe or anything else, you seems strongly bias in your judgement.
I'm sorry, but they are actually lies. If you say your model is correct and its predictions proven wrong you lied. You lied letting people think your model is correct. You lied not making the mandatory statements about the probability of occurence of your prediction. Climate models comes with a responsability.
There was no before. Time was created with the Big Bang. Otherwise you are saying the Big Bang occured in a pre-existing universe, which is not the case. Then you have to ask yourself about this pre-existing universe and how it was created and so on. The before question is pointless.
Flying SpaceShip WhateverNumber is still an Earth bound situation. Until they escape Earth's gravitational field we can consider them bound to the Earth. No judge will rule against that argument after hearing experts.
"One of the great theories of modern cosmology is that the universe began in a "Big Bang", but the mathematical mechanism by which this occurred has been lacking."
WTF is that? A mathematical mechanism by which this occured? I mean, the universe is physical, the mechanism is physical, the mathematics are a description or a model for the physical thing, not the reverse. A mathematical model can describe and be close to the reality, but it can also describe something which doesn't exist at all. Sketching a mathematical model for the Big Bang doesn't mean the model is valid and describe the reality, you need experimental facts, and enough of them, to make sure the model/description is within the boundaries of the reality.
Thanks for the comments. I read another article about this and they left us think it would be suitable to build medical accelerators and small size accelerators for many purposes. Apparently it is not the case.
Actually, it is the accelaration module that is 1 foot long. It is not a collider, it is an accelerator a collider would be at least two feet long and in reality would have more than one acceleration module.
You cannot say that. Nobody knows how the knowledge is represented in brain. You can think of a particular knowledge the other party has never experienced in the past, will this other party able to extract the meaning from such a thing? I doubt greatly it would be the case. The same thing as some words just do not exist at all in some languages because there was never a need for such words and to designed or describe such things.
For now, this experiment is at a very basic level which can be represented in a binary form. Nothing that can be compared to a language and what the written or spoken language enables us to communicate.
Remember, my OP was about what these companies are seeking for: A guy keeping current and running seminars on hot topics all the time in addition to his day job. Keep in mind if you have to run seminars on hot topics, you have to master those hot topics, where do you manage to have the time to master these hot topics elsewhere than your day job and the hours you run and prepare seminars on these hot topics?
If it is not asking someone to dedicated his life entirely to his job I wonder what it is. No families allowed here, forget about kids and $150K/yr is a very bad paycheck for all these hours.
May be right now these most successful companies are able to make this strategy work. I don't believe it will work very long.
Once I am at it, do not forget neither a lawyer and physician will have a career for their lifetime. At the pace these companies are trying to squeeze the juice out of their employees, these will be burnt within 15 years. Then looks who will complain about qualified professionals shortage.
Most paid lawyers are doing commercial and fiscal law and must keep up with the law. In fact, it is somewhat comparable to an high tech job in IT you have to constantly keep up with new stuff. These lawyers are paid way well above 150K$/yr, they are in the range of 500K$/yr and above.
BTW, if the company is looking for candidates offering seminars on hot topics and each company in the town is looking for candidates offering seminars on hot topics I believe this requires a shit-load of seminars on hot topics in the town to run weekly and given the number of seminars on hot topics in town, I guess no one is available to attend seminars on hot topics or willing to pay for seminars on hot topics because too many seminars on hot topics make hot topics cold. How many positions can you fill with people giving seminars on hot topics? How much are you willing to pay for this kind of guy who is supposed to be hot and highly demanded given the hot topics he is giving seminars on?
"For example, some of the most successful companies find their talent through engagement with the technical community, participating in hackathons or offering seminars on hot topics such as Scala and Hadoop. These companies play a long game in order to lodge in the consciousness of the candidates they hope will apply next time they're ready to make a move."
So, you are supposed to work during the day and participate in hackathons during the evening and week ends. These are looking for slaves. I can't believe this is the model someone consider as being successful. Why only in IT this kind of things happen? Do you ask a lawyer to do hackathons? Participate in contests for a slice of pizza and a flat beer? Do IT employees considered people with families, with kids, with a right to do something else not related to computers during the week ends, during the evening? This world is broken.
As a IT prospect, do you respect yourself enough to refuse this kind of slavery?
It isn't a centrifuge for start and a reactor isn't a bomb. Reaching critical mass does not lead to a bomb, it leads to a huge radiation emission. Even if the principles behind the bomb are not that difficult to understand, making one is another matter.