While I will not be able to design the inner workings of a single piece of hardware (in other words, design and build new pieces of hardware), I will be able to design a network of multiple machines that will meet the demands of the various clients.
Yes, it does take more than some certifications. It also takes into account meeting with the client and my coworkers to discuss their needs and finding hardware that will be able to meet their needs without over-spending on hardware.
In all honesty, I hated getting my Master's degree. It was a painful experience (because I thought it was a waste of money). In the end, I am glad I did it.
Why? Because if all you want is a contracting position, where you do exactly what your manager tells you to do, then get a certificate of some sort. If you want to be involved in the decision making process, then, at the minimum, you need an undergrad degree. If you want to be targeted for PHB positions early on in your career, get a graduate degree.
Please, I have a Political Science undergrad and a Master's Degree in Public Administration. I've been working for a very large IT firm for seven years in their ERP practice. They just asked me to become a hardware architect, they'll send me to classes over the next two years to get the necessary certifications.
In other words, the undergrad degree doesn't matter. Get a grad degree, THEN pick up the skill through your work experience.
Boeing wanted to relocate its headquarters anyway; they went to Chicago, not because they'd go out of business if they didn't get a break on the new HQ, but because the city and state governments there voluntarily offered a carrot. This is not the same as a subsidy.
That is an interesting definition of what happened. According to Webster.com, this is the definition of a subsidy. In other words, the governments of Chicago, Dallas and Saint Louis were all willing to give millions of dollar in tax breaks for somewhere around 500 jobs. That was a subsidy, at least according to Webster's dictionary.
If local citizens pressure the government to give them goodies then that's between the government and the citizens. When the government BUYS SOMETHING from Boeing, it isn't a subsidy.
True, but the development of weapons systems does not occur in a vaccuum. The military and Boeing sit in a room together and design the weapons systems together. The military then provides seed money to Boeing and the company uses that money to develop prototypes. For example, the cost of the new Join Strike Figher(see here and here, is on such a long timeline--starting about 1994--and is so expensive that neither Boeing or Lockheed could afford to develop a simple prototype without a government subsidy. Both Boeing and Lockheed spent millions of dollars (both their own and government subsidies) to develop the prototypes over the course of years. In 2001, the military awarded the contract to Lockheed. Note that today, the only two major military aircraft builders are Lockheed and Boeing. It was rumored that if the government didn't provide the contract to Lockheed, it was highly likely that Lockheed would have gone out of business, leaving the US with one manufacturer of military aircraft.
Airbus gets money from the European governments and provides nothing in return.
Really? Are they that much different from the Chicago's, Seattle's and San Diego's? All of those cities have provided millions in subsidies for jobs. Are not the national governments of Europe just providing money for Airbus jobs? And, according to some of the articles on a A380, about 40% of the material in the A380 is purchased in the United States. In effect, the Europeans are subsidizing some communities here in the States.
(Note that I am NOT personally in favor of subsidies by any government, I am just pointing out that both Boeing and Airbus are subsidized).
It recieves no free handouts of operating cash, no below market rate loans, etc from the government.
Didn't Boeing recently move it's HQ? And, didn't it receive a subsidy from Chicago and IL to do that? Oh, and doesn't it get subsidies from various local communities to construct manufacturing plants?
And, yes, defense spending IS a subsidy. If you live in a community that has a defense plant/army base, the economy of the entire community depends on that facility. Congress appropriates defense appropriations upon the power of the member of Congress, NOT upon the need of the military. If you don't believe it, take a look at what happens every time the Pentagon tries to close military bases. Or, take a look at what happened when the military tried to kill the V22-Osprey.
Otherwise, Airbus as a company is, and has been ever since its inception, heavily subsidized so it sucks for all the other taxpayers who don't work on it.
Oddly enough, the main competitor to Airbus, Boeing, is heavily subsidized, as well. If memory serves me correctly, Boeing is the single largest defense contractor in the US. If it's not the largest, it is one of the top three.
Ah, I wasn't implying that the theory was inferior. I was implying that this story is only relevant when the professor actually completes his task. At this point, he isn't even half-way finished.
First off, there's no reason why we in the west should make our laws in response to some culturally ingrained misogyny that takes place in other countries.
Really? What makes you think the preference for male children is limited strictly to developing countries?
Second, if we take your argument to its logical conclusion, the government should by extension be able to dictate the sex of your baby. If the politicians believe there are "too many" men, then they could force everyone to have baby girls until they believe the balance has been restored. I think this would be a dangerous power to give to a bunch of self-serving politicians.
What makes you think I am in favor of government dictating the sex of children? And, how can you call this a "logical" conclusion? Your argument is specious.
Third, if everyone in China was free to choose the sex of their baby and most people chose to have boys, women would become more valuable as a result. This might actually help to erase the cultural bias against women.
China has had a one-child policy for over 20 years. In that time, the gender ratio of children continues to show significant favoritism to male children. If China hasn't change in over 20 years, how long will it take for the cultural forces to move in favor of female children? And, if it did change today, you still have millions of single men in China that will have to wait about 18 years for those young girls to become old enough to marry.
Slashdot Mirror
Too much work. It's just easier to do what Google tells me to do.
While I will not be able to design the inner workings of a single piece of hardware (in other words, design and build new pieces of hardware), I will be able to design a network of multiple machines that will meet the demands of the various clients.
Yes, it does take more than some certifications. It also takes into account meeting with the client and my coworkers to discuss their needs and finding hardware that will be able to meet their needs without over-spending on hardware.
In all honesty, I hated getting my Master's degree. It was a painful experience (because I thought it was a waste of money). In the end, I am glad I did it.
Why? Because if all you want is a contracting position, where you do exactly what your manager tells you to do, then get a certificate of some sort. If you want to be involved in the decision making process, then, at the minimum, you need an undergrad degree. If you want to be targeted for PHB positions early on in your career, get a graduate degree.
Please, I have a Political Science undergrad and a Master's Degree in Public Administration. I've been working for a very large IT firm for seven years in their ERP practice. They just asked me to become a hardware architect, they'll send me to classes over the next two years to get the necessary certifications.
In other words, the undergrad degree doesn't matter. Get a grad degree, THEN pick up the skill through your work experience.
A parody of a parody? Just thinking about it gives me a headache.
That is an interesting definition of what happened. According to Webster.com, this is the definition of a subsidy. In other words, the governments of Chicago, Dallas and Saint Louis were all willing to give millions of dollar in tax breaks for somewhere around 500 jobs. That was a subsidy, at least according to Webster's dictionary.
If local citizens pressure the government to give them goodies then that's between the government and the citizens. When the government BUYS SOMETHING from Boeing, it isn't a subsidy.True, but the development of weapons systems does not occur in a vaccuum. The military and Boeing sit in a room together and design the weapons systems together. The military then provides seed money to Boeing and the company uses that money to develop prototypes. For example, the cost of the new Join Strike Figher(see here and here, is on such a long timeline--starting about 1994--and is so expensive that neither Boeing or Lockheed could afford to develop a simple prototype without a government subsidy. Both Boeing and Lockheed spent millions of dollars (both their own and government subsidies) to develop the prototypes over the course of years. In 2001, the military awarded the contract to Lockheed. Note that today, the only two major military aircraft builders are Lockheed and Boeing. It was rumored that if the government didn't provide the contract to Lockheed, it was highly likely that Lockheed would have gone out of business, leaving the US with one manufacturer of military aircraft.
Airbus gets money from the European governments and provides nothing in return.Really? Are they that much different from the Chicago's, Seattle's and San Diego's? All of those cities have provided millions in subsidies for jobs. Are not the national governments of Europe just providing money for Airbus jobs? And, according to some of the articles on a A380, about 40% of the material in the A380 is purchased in the United States. In effect, the Europeans are subsidizing some communities here in the States.
(Note that I am NOT personally in favor of subsidies by any government, I am just pointing out that both Boeing and Airbus are subsidized).
Didn't Boeing recently move it's HQ? And, didn't it receive a subsidy from Chicago and IL to do that? Oh, and doesn't it get subsidies from various local communities to construct manufacturing plants?
And, yes, defense spending IS a subsidy. If you live in a community that has a defense plant/army base, the economy of the entire community depends on that facility. Congress appropriates defense appropriations upon the power of the member of Congress, NOT upon the need of the military. If you don't believe it, take a look at what happens every time the Pentagon tries to close military bases. Or, take a look at what happened when the military tried to kill the V22-Osprey.
Oddly enough, the main competitor to Airbus, Boeing, is heavily subsidized, as well. If memory serves me correctly, Boeing is the single largest defense contractor in the US. If it's not the largest, it is one of the top three.
Actually it looks more like a piece of Beagle
Personally, I love the joystick/eraserhead. My Think Pad T-40 has both a nipple and a touchpad. I just turn off the touch pad and use the eraserhead.
They can take a beating and STILL keep on working. Best built laptop, bar none.
Ah, I wasn't implying that the theory was inferior. I was implying that this story is only relevant when the professor actually completes his task. At this point, he isn't even half-way finished.
Right after George W Bush was referred to as "That WASP President".
Try using The New Math.
So, he's involved with outlining the first part of a potential two-part solution to something that is only a theory?
Only old Koreans subconsciously add statements to posts.
Wow, with such a talented director, we can only hope they find a nice, juicy acting role for Sofia Coppola. That would just be the icing on the cake.
No one will really be free until nerd persecution ends!
In other news, 600,000 Catholics are in line at the wrong basillica....
Uh...no. GWB is a Big Government Republican.
Actually, the Password was 1-2-3-4-5.
I found that to be rather disturbing, since I have the same combination on my luggage.
FYI -- Clusty is owned by the folks that created vivisimo.
Google is the next to last search engine?
How about vivisimo? The name sucks, but the tool is great.
Really? What makes you think the preference for male children is limited strictly to developing countries?
Second, if we take your argument to its logical conclusion, the government should by extension be able to dictate the sex of your baby. If the politicians believe there are "too many" men, then they could force everyone to have baby girls until they believe the balance has been restored. I think this would be a dangerous power to give to a bunch of self-serving politicians.What makes you think I am in favor of government dictating the sex of children? And, how can you call this a "logical" conclusion? Your argument is specious.
Third, if everyone in China was free to choose the sex of their baby and most people chose to have boys, women would become more valuable as a result. This might actually help to erase the cultural bias against women.China has had a one-child policy for over 20 years. In that time, the gender ratio of children continues to show significant favoritism to male children. If China hasn't change in over 20 years, how long will it take for the cultural forces to move in favor of female children? And, if it did change today, you still have millions of single men in China that will have to wait about 18 years for those young girls to become old enough to marry.