I paid about $200 a semester for my undergraduate degree (in computer science). When I graduated there was no question of being a barista, unless I wanted to.
Where I currently am university tuition is cheaper, adjusted for inflation, than it has been since the 60s. Perhaps what you're complaining about is a regional problem. Or perhaps it's due to thinking you have to go to a ridiculously priced private university for a degree.
Re:Did Zuckerberg ever have to get past HR?
on
Just Say No To College
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The become a tech billionaire thing is exactly like pro sports. Occasionally someone makes it big but the vast majority of people who try are going to end up disappointed, 30, and with nothing to fall back on.
Plus low-skill tech is a maturing industry. Zuckerberg and the app millionaires got in at the beginning. Normally in tech you need a lot more knowledge than they have (or a lot of money, or both). Jobs was a sales genius, backed up by an electronics genius and again, lucky and in the right place at the right time.
Hopefully you're using "America" to mean "United States of America" because we're quite familiar with UHT milk in Canada. People who can go through a carton in a week usually get pasteurized but tetra packed UHT milk is available for people who need it to last longer. We used to always take it camping.
Sitting in a dark room with a spotlight shining on your e-ink screen will give you eyestrain too. Turn the brightness down. Your eyes don't know whether the photons are reflected or not.
What? An iPad or equivalent Android has an 8 hour battery which is plenty. Not to mention the OP is probably reading at his desk with power available if needed. It's not too heavy, particularly if you've got your feet up and the thing supported on your legs.
Yup. iAnnotate and the iPad are a big part of my workflow now. Hundreds of papers annotated, sorted, searchable and available from Dropbox (important ones on my iPad) any time I need.
And absolutely when I need to read a paper it goes to DB, onto my iPad and my feet go up.
I'm not saying that home school is always bad. There is a tradition of apprenticing your kids to someone else though, even if it's the same trade as your own (as it usually was). It's hard to teach someone closely related to you, particularly if the subject is difficult.
There are a lot of shitty teachers in the world. Actual trained teachers aren't immune, but their average quality is substantially higher than the population at large. Personally I think it's important for kids to learn as a group AND for parents to teach them at home. Neither one works well without the other.
The math is overly simplified. There is no realistic way the mass could be concentrated at the centre. It takes an infinitely long time for infalling mass to just reach the event horizon.
That stupid quote has always bothered me. "Understanding" doesn't mean knowledge of every feature to an arbitrary level of detail. I understand the basic functioning of my couch even though it contains more particles than my brain so my brain cannot possibly contain arbitrarily detailed knowledge of it.
It's not quite that simple. The usual relativistic treatment of black holes seems to use a point source simplification (like you do with Newtonian gravity in high school). All the mass is assumed to be concentrated in the singularity, at the centre of the black hole. If that's the case then you're correct - the black hole consists of empty space with a point of infinite density at the middle.
But how exactly do you achieve that? The event horizon, among other things, is where time stops from the perspective of an outside observer. So from that perspective all the matter falling into a black hole slows down as it falls inward, taking an infinite amount of time to get to the horizon itself. It seems you can't cross the event horizon even if you wanted to. But if you keep dropping matter towards a black hole the event horizon will grow outwards. This must lead to a distribution of "frozen" matter throughout the volume of the black hole, which would make the GP's observation not so arbitrary after all.
I'm speculating, so if I've made an error I'd be interested to hear what it is.
I object to the colloquial way you use "infinite" but it appears at least one dictionary has acquiesced to the dumbing down of the language in that regard. The ACs usage wasn't even close.
Sorry, the dictionary disagrees with you, the consensus of practicing homeopaths disagrees with you and the founder of the fraud that is homeopathy disagrees with you. Throughout all this you also haven't provided a single reference that remotely supports your position. I think this discussion has wasted quite enough of my time. You seem determined to waste yours believing in bunk, but there's always hope you might reconnect with reality someday. Fingers crossed for you.
I suppose if you find getting into space unimaginably difficult then your usage was acceptable in the colloquial sense. You seem fairly bright though: with a little bit of reading you can probably discover that it's not trivial but not really beyond imagination either. People actually do it quite regularly.
Delivering a nuke to the moon would have meant rockets capable of making the trip. That was the real development. I'm really not sure why it's frightening. ICBMs are frightening. Nukes that can make it to the moon, and nukes in space are... meh.
A stealthed nuke or two would probably end that endeavour very effectively. The rock lobber would likely be very vulnerable to attack, as would the bases themselves.
Other types of schooling including apprenticeship, personal teachers and universities are a lot older than that. The idea that teaching your own kids is not such a hot idea is quite old, probably at least thousands of years.
It's much harder to get a nuke to the moon. You're climbing up the big gravity well and falling down the little one instead of vice versa. It took a Saturn V to get people to the moon and only a couple of puny boosters to get them back.
Slashdot Mirror
When your neighbour dies, you're wanted for questioning and you run, trying to skip the country, most police forces will pursue you pretty hard.
I paid about $200 a semester for my undergraduate degree (in computer science). When I graduated there was no question of being a barista, unless I wanted to.
Where I currently am university tuition is cheaper, adjusted for inflation, than it has been since the 60s. Perhaps what you're complaining about is a regional problem. Or perhaps it's due to thinking you have to go to a ridiculously priced private university for a degree.
The become a tech billionaire thing is exactly like pro sports. Occasionally someone makes it big but the vast majority of people who try are going to end up disappointed, 30, and with nothing to fall back on.
Plus low-skill tech is a maturing industry. Zuckerberg and the app millionaires got in at the beginning. Normally in tech you need a lot more knowledge than they have (or a lot of money, or both). Jobs was a sales genius, backed up by an electronics genius and again, lucky and in the right place at the right time.
Hopefully you're using "America" to mean "United States of America" because we're quite familiar with UHT milk in Canada. People who can go through a carton in a week usually get pasteurized but tetra packed UHT milk is available for people who need it to last longer. We used to always take it camping.
Sitting in a dark room with a spotlight shining on your e-ink screen will give you eyestrain too. Turn the brightness down. Your eyes don't know whether the photons are reflected or not.
For the last paper I had published the journal actually had iAnnotate Pro instructions for correcting the galley proofs.
What? An iPad or equivalent Android has an 8 hour battery which is plenty. Not to mention the OP is probably reading at his desk with power available if needed. It's not too heavy, particularly if you've got your feet up and the thing supported on your legs.
Holographic screens? Keep dreaming.
Yup. iAnnotate and the iPad are a big part of my workflow now. Hundreds of papers annotated, sorted, searchable and available from Dropbox (important ones on my iPad) any time I need.
And absolutely when I need to read a paper it goes to DB, onto my iPad and my feet go up.
I'm not saying that home school is always bad. There is a tradition of apprenticing your kids to someone else though, even if it's the same trade as your own (as it usually was). It's hard to teach someone closely related to you, particularly if the subject is difficult.
There are a lot of shitty teachers in the world. Actual trained teachers aren't immune, but their average quality is substantially higher than the population at large. Personally I think it's important for kids to learn as a group AND for parents to teach them at home. Neither one works well without the other.
The math is overly simplified. There is no realistic way the mass could be concentrated at the centre. It takes an infinitely long time for infalling mass to just reach the event horizon.
That stupid quote has always bothered me. "Understanding" doesn't mean knowledge of every feature to an arbitrary level of detail. I understand the basic functioning of my couch even though it contains more particles than my brain so my brain cannot possibly contain arbitrarily detailed knowledge of it.
It's not quite that simple. The usual relativistic treatment of black holes seems to use a point source simplification (like you do with Newtonian gravity in high school). All the mass is assumed to be concentrated in the singularity, at the centre of the black hole. If that's the case then you're correct - the black hole consists of empty space with a point of infinite density at the middle.
But how exactly do you achieve that? The event horizon, among other things, is where time stops from the perspective of an outside observer. So from that perspective all the matter falling into a black hole slows down as it falls inward, taking an infinite amount of time to get to the horizon itself. It seems you can't cross the event horizon even if you wanted to. But if you keep dropping matter towards a black hole the event horizon will grow outwards. This must lead to a distribution of "frozen" matter throughout the volume of the black hole, which would make the GP's observation not so arbitrary after all.
I'm speculating, so if I've made an error I'd be interested to hear what it is.
Oh, no, it was the AC that said that, sorry.
I object to the colloquial way you use "infinite" but it appears at least one dictionary has acquiesced to the dumbing down of the language in that regard. The ACs usage wasn't even close.
Sorry, the dictionary disagrees with you, the consensus of practicing homeopaths disagrees with you and the founder of the fraud that is homeopathy disagrees with you. Throughout all this you also haven't provided a single reference that remotely supports your position. I think this discussion has wasted quite enough of my time. You seem determined to waste yours believing in bunk, but there's always hope you might reconnect with reality someday. Fingers crossed for you.
I suppose if you find getting into space unimaginably difficult then your usage was acceptable in the colloquial sense. You seem fairly bright though: with a little bit of reading you can probably discover that it's not trivial but not really beyond imagination either. People actually do it quite regularly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_higher-learning_institutions
Or Python, which is also free, has most of the MatLab functions, and doesn't have the same language syntax.
Actually it was the CFX-9800g:
http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://www.griffin-contracting.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/casio_cfx-9800g.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.griffin-contracting.com/?p%3D2788&h=780&w=650&sz=74&tbnid=sOHnS5IBG_LfWM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=75&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dcasio%2B9800g%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=casio+9800g&usg=__8q8cC3Oq_JirN4GUSryGeflPwjI=&docid=6Km24fi4LlSJpM&sa=X&ei=1qi4UPbrL4Hm9ATx7ICQBw&ved=0CDAQ9QEwAA&dur=116
Mine is around somewhere. I've only replaced the battery once.
Delivering a nuke to the moon would have meant rockets capable of making the trip. That was the real development. I'm really not sure why it's frightening. ICBMs are frightening. Nukes that can make it to the moon, and nukes in space are... meh.
Propulsion out of gravity wells, on the other hand, does have some pretty strict time limits.
A stealthed nuke or two would probably end that endeavour very effectively. The rock lobber would likely be very vulnerable to attack, as would the bases themselves.
Other types of schooling including apprenticeship, personal teachers and universities are a lot older than that. The idea that teaching your own kids is not such a hot idea is quite old, probably at least thousands of years.
Why is it frightening or stupid? I find nuking the moon a lot less frightening than nuking the Earth... 2000 times.
I do not think that word (infinite) means what you think it means. Either of you.
It's much harder to get a nuke to the moon. You're climbing up the big gravity well and falling down the little one instead of vice versa. It took a Saturn V to get people to the moon and only a couple of puny boosters to get them back.