I know for a fact that the NC state gov't paid contractors nicely during the dot.com bust to turn COBOL into Java.
I'd imagine you'd make quite a bit for yourself if you could automate that process, or just write a decent COBOL interpreter.
The devil would be in the many many many details. I never learned COBOL, but I know enough about it to know that it's a simple language made horrendously complex with an assload of coupling between I/O subsystems and formatting/presentation code. And then there's database access..
Here's hoping the manned missions to Mars never get funded.
I for one want real research done with my tax dollars. Robots and rovers need nowhere near the care and feeding in a hostile environment that a human passenger would require. A manned mission is nothing more than an expensive stunt.
Having said that, the mission patch for Apollo XI sure looks cool.
There are plenty of bad programmers out there who are content to churn out bad code.
That's why I am ever so grateful to the submitter of this post. I have to deal with crap code every day, from people overseas who are clearly in this field only for the money.
Meanwhile, our submitter knows he's not the greatest coder since Dennis Ritchie, and doesn't want to get in anyone else's way. If he were a manager, yeah, I'd work with him.
Props to you, sir. If more like you accepted and understood their strengths and limitations, the world would be a much better place. (Or at least the code in it would be.)
Thank you! The whole argument for supplanting a welfare system with a series of charities (religious or otherwise) is bogus because of one of the points you made. Specifically, the latter model can't scale to meet demand.
I'm not saying our welfare system is great (is isn't), and it wasn't so wonderful when I was actually on it as a wee lad. But I fail to see who a properly administered and funded program can be outstripped by bakes sales at Our Lady of Perpetual Motion.
Don't forget that Bill Clinton character, who had "no experience" when he was elected. I'd take the peace, prosperity, and balanced budgets of the '90s again, thank you.
The big black eye from Obama's campaign goes to the Democratic Leadership Council, who were hoping one of their own (Hillary) would be the nominee. The grass roots of the party (you know, the voters) basically told the DLC that they were tired of their failing leadership and the resulting election losses.
We may not need something as drastic as a Manhattan Project. How about the Apollo program instead?
When JFK pledged to put a man on the moon in 10 years, we did it -- even though the Cold War arguments re: national security were a bit hysterical.
Why can't we have a leader pledge to reduce America's dependence on oil by 50% in 10 years? Sounds just as possible to me as Apollo XI would have in 1960. And it's obviously more practical.
I hate to break it to you, but scientific reasoning is based on reproducible evidence and empiricism, not faith. There may be some belief, but those beliefs are based on facts that have been clearly observed in controlled, repeatable experiments. (I believe in the Law of Conservation of Matter, but only insofar as nobody has ever managed to produce a verifiable counter-example.)
This is a bit more reasonable than someone saying "well, God did it".
The producers of this flick are not the sharpest tools in the shed. You can see why after reading P. Z. Myers' blog about his adventures during the advanced screening and media conference calls. (Too funny.)
But another issue that nobody has talked about is that John Lennon's "Imagine" was used without any licensing. The producers apparently thought it was in the public domain, and inserted it into a montage of Holocaust imagery.
There's no word yet on whether or not Yoko Ono will sue the producers as a result. I hope she does, if only because it's morally wrong to allow stupid people to keep their money.
I got my undergraduate degree from a liberal arts college (CS major, math minor), but then, after a small hiatus, received an MS from a well-known technical school.
A few random observations from a veteran of industry:
The best new grads took roughly the same path; they never stopped at their bachelor's degree. This is generally because they'd have to be more motivated to take this path, and are thus more interested in the subject matter, not just the money. (Again, before anyone flames me, that's a generalization.) I can tell who was only interested in the cash, and "served their four years", by the software they design -- and I'd love to smack these people for making my life miserable on a daily basis. But I digress.
Some grad programs' admissions committees actually value a liberal arts education over one that is purely technical. They like the idea that you managed to learn how to think critically in a variety of subject matter, vs. learning how to put Tab A into Slot A.
You can (usually) make up your technical shortcomings in a good master's program. Just choose that next program carefully, e.g. don't pick one that's extra-heavy on theory if you're more interested in, say, networking protocols or systems programming.
The LA college will have a far better student/teacher ratio in all likelihood. Your professors will probably be far more approachable and accessible. (I count one of mine as a family friend today, and it's been almost 20 years since I received my B.Sc.) Believe me, it's a lot more rewarding to sit in a class of 20 with a caring instructor than a class of 300 and an underpaid T.A.
If you go this route, don't bother applying to the top-rated graduate programs unless you already know you'll stick around for the Ph.D. and have a thesis adviser lined up. Chances are you won't get in. But it's also not the end of the world, not by a long shot.
Seriously, you'll never convince some people simply because they're arrogant enough to believe that their world view (often tainted by religion) is inviolable. I actually knew of a geologist who was a Young Earth type: the Bible was literal truth, fossils exist only to test our faith, etc. etc. How he managed to get through academia with that foolishness rattling around in his head amazed me.
And this guy was working where I was at the time: Los Alamos National Laboratory, a place not known for hiring idiots (intentionally anyway).
The funny thing is these folks will complain that you're trying to change "their reality", as if reality was subjective, let alone theirs.
So I just tell people like this my honest opinions anymore: This topic simply cannot be understood by someone with your level of intellect.
Insulting? Well, tough shit. My reality is the objective one, and both it and I simply don't care.
Slashdot Mirror
The dipshit likes Bill O'Reilly, what did you expect?
Fine, mod me Flamebait. I get all I need to know from Stephen Colbert anyway.
I know for a fact that the NC state gov't paid contractors nicely during the dot.com bust to turn COBOL into Java.
I'd imagine you'd make quite a bit for yourself if you could automate that process, or just write a decent COBOL interpreter.
The devil would be in the many many many details. I never learned COBOL, but I know enough about it to know that it's a simple language made horrendously complex with an assload of coupling between I/O subsystems and formatting/presentation code. And then there's database access..
That was easy..
Applied Materials people make the point that installation is now half the cost of the completed solar system
I guess downgrading Pluto from planet status helped..
I for one do NOT have dreams of serving time for a felony.
I love reading legal documents where it's clear that the person being deposed is Katherine Harris crazy
Fixed it for ya.
Seriously tho', we need to put a stop to the disease that is Florida. To quote Bugs Bunny: "South America, take it away!"
Here's hoping the manned missions to Mars never get funded.
I for one want real research done with my tax dollars. Robots and rovers need nowhere near the care and feeding in a hostile environment that a human passenger would require. A manned mission is nothing more than an expensive stunt.
Having said that, the mission patch for Apollo XI sure looks cool.
That's why I am ever so grateful to the submitter of this post. I have to deal with crap code every day, from people overseas who are clearly in this field only for the money.
Meanwhile, our submitter knows he's not the greatest coder since Dennis Ritchie, and doesn't want to get in anyone else's way. If he were a manager, yeah, I'd work with him.
Props to you, sir. If more like you accepted and understood their strengths and limitations, the world would be a much better place. (Or at least the code in it would be.)
Any technology that can promise to shoot Bruce Willis into space one day is worth pursuing.
(Just get Steve Buscemi back please.)
Would you rather die for the side led by Bush, Cheney, and company?
And VW's lineup will only get better.
Oh I want one of these. Get thee to the States already!!
Thank you! The whole argument for supplanting a welfare system with a series of charities (religious or otherwise) is bogus because of one of the points you made. Specifically, the latter model can't scale to meet demand.
I'm not saying our welfare system is great (is isn't), and it wasn't so wonderful when I was actually on it as a wee lad. But I fail to see who a properly administered and funded program can be outstripped by bakes sales at Our Lady of Perpetual Motion.
Don't forget that Bill Clinton character, who had "no experience" when he was elected. I'd take the peace, prosperity, and balanced budgets of the '90s again, thank you.
The big black eye from Obama's campaign goes to the Democratic Leadership Council, who were hoping one of their own (Hillary) would be the nominee. The grass roots of the party (you know, the voters) basically told the DLC that they were tired of their failing leadership and the resulting election losses.
Whatever may happen next, the roots have spoken.
Having flown Thai Airways recently, I can safely say that not all airlines treat their customers like cattle. American carriers, however..
Other alternatives to the "duct tape/Sharpie" solution:
When JFK pledged to put a man on the moon in 10 years, we did it -- even though the Cold War arguments re: national security were a bit hysterical.
Why can't we have a leader pledge to reduce America's dependence on oil by 50% in 10 years? Sounds just as possible to me as Apollo XI would have in 1960. And it's obviously more practical.
How any location on the Earth's crust can be the "center of the earth" eludes me.
Um... no.
I hate to break it to you, but scientific reasoning is based on reproducible evidence and empiricism, not faith. There may be some belief, but those beliefs are based on facts that have been clearly observed in controlled, repeatable experiments. (I believe in the Law of Conservation of Matter, but only insofar as nobody has ever managed to produce a verifiable counter-example.)
This is a bit more reasonable than someone saying "well, God did it".
But another issue that nobody has talked about is that John Lennon's "Imagine" was used without any licensing. The producers apparently thought it was in the public domain, and inserted it into a montage of Holocaust imagery.
There's no word yet on whether or not Yoko Ono will sue the producers as a result. I hope she does, if only because it's morally wrong to allow stupid people to keep their money.
I got my undergraduate degree from a liberal arts college (CS major, math minor), but then, after a small hiatus, received an MS from a well-known technical school.
A few random observations from a veteran of industry:
Good luck!
This is a real issue for yours truly. I'm legally blind in one eye (20/400 with lenses). 3-D hardly ever works for me.
I have more cause than most people to truly despise those pictures with stereoscopic dots.
So depth perception isn't as automatic for me. Aren't you glad I'm not a proctologist?
Ah, a fellow Rensselaer grad. Did you manage to defeat The Ratio?
My honest opinion is that some folks are yadda yadda. Because they choose to IGNORE facts.
(Man, someone modded my OP as Flamebait. Just a little sensitive today, aren't we..)
Seriously, you'll never convince some people simply because they're arrogant enough to believe that their world view (often tainted by religion) is inviolable. I actually knew of a geologist who was a Young Earth type: the Bible was literal truth, fossils exist only to test our faith, etc. etc. How he managed to get through academia with that foolishness rattling around in his head amazed me.
And this guy was working where I was at the time: Los Alamos National Laboratory, a place not known for hiring idiots (intentionally anyway).
The funny thing is these folks will complain that you're trying to change "their reality", as if reality was subjective, let alone theirs.
So I just tell people like this my honest opinions anymore: This topic simply cannot be understood by someone with your level of intellect.
Insulting? Well, tough shit. My reality is the objective one, and both it and I simply don't care.
Agreed. Don't say "you're as dense as a Pomeranian" when "as a dog" will do.
For a minute, I thought it read "one minute of SILENCE for five hours of cable news".
If only.