First, I know this is OT. However, it's as OT as the rest of posts....
This reminds me about an interview Richard Feynman gave a long time ago. It was after he finished working at Los Alamos. He was depressed. Everywhere he went, he couldn't understand why people were building things anymore. He had just spent the last 4 years helping build the most destructive weapon known to man. He was sure the world was going to end any day now. Safe to say, he was wrong. We've had apocolyptic doomsayers for a long time. The world didn't end in 1944. It didn't end over Cuba. It hasn't ended over the middle-east. Look, I know there are priorities. However, your post could randomly apply to anything. Certianly death and war is more important than games, the California election, movies, sports, and most everything else.
My guess is that your depressed about something else. So for whatever it is worth, I stop worrying about the world along time ago. I've learned to hate all politicians equally, let vocal religious extremists argue among themselves, and I don't have a preference for the spelling of the word flavor/flavour.
While most of these "new media" (it's not so NEW anymore) theorists make me puke. The only thing worse than a "new media" theorist, is a wannabe "new media" theorist.
I find Chris Crawford to be an exception. Maybe it's because he's actually designed games and he was good at it. If Mr. Crawford writes an 11 part series I might read it.
Why doesn't somebody publish a book of proprietary to open-source case studies? I mean a detailed how-to book. Collect a bunch of articles with real-life case studies of these solutions. Include some technical details and a business-speak analysis at the end.
It sure beats another PHPMYSQLLINUXIN5MINUTES book. Please don't write another intro to PHP/MySQL and web publishing book. We really don't need it.
People will always find ways to "slack off" at work. Although, it's impossible to be 100% productive all the time. Frankly, I wish more employers would state reasonable standards of productivity and just worry about employees meeting those standards. I know people would abuse that too.
I've seen completely lazy people, and I've seen bosses who micromanage. So it really goes both ways.
I know this is slightly off-topic. In a system that gives us leaders like Strom Thurmond, William Byrd, Ted Kennedy, and Ernest Hollings, how is the California re-election bad? Have you ever watched C-SPAN? Those guys aren't even cohorent. Heck, I'd say there sometimes comatose. It's almost as fun as Slashdot!
I know the situation isn't the same. However, it is an interesting thought. Will we ever get so sick of IP law, that we will stage a modern day Boston Tea Party? Even if we don't, it makes for an interesting look at my country's revolution.
Another interesting point is that the British felt the taxes imposed were legitimate given the cost of the French and Indian War.
I think the problem is with the nature of modern computer industry hiring process. Thanks to monster, head hunters, and the dot com bust the industry has turned into a meat market. Gee, let's ask 100 questions about some API. That's really going to help me judge a person's programming ability. The average PhD in CS isn't going to rush to the mall to read the SAMS UNLEASHED/O'REILLY/WAITE GROUP PRESS book. Hopefully, they read Dr. Dobbs and some other professional journals. I wonder what the average interviewer thinks of Knuth, Dijkstra, or Minsky. Yeah there's a lot of worthless knowledge in The Art of Computer Programming. I mean, who needs to write an algorithm anymore. I'm sure they don't have any practical skills.
I wish there was more emphasis on sample code and past projects or work experience. However, my experience is that most of the screening/interview process is a glorified grep on my resume and a couple pendantic questions about some really tedious aspect. Look I've played the IT game for a while. I suppose it gets better for more serious engineers. However, I've heard it really doesn't.
Incidently, my favorite related tidbit was when our development team was faced with a NP hard problem and one of the programmers brushed off such worthless "theoretical" issues by saying, "Oh I know QuickSort". Which is real funny since we where dealing with an optimization problem.
Here's the problem with this discussion. Intelligence is more than just processing power. It's more than just statistics. You need to be able to feel to function as a human. (I understand the irony of posting this on slashdot.) When you touch something and hurt yourself you learn. When you see a pretty girl and the dopamine kicks in, your motivated. Frankly, the mathematics and engineering is trivial. We just don't have a "full map of the human physiology". In order to create a robot slave who doesn't mind being a slave, yet retains the intelligence to be useful, is probably not possible.
Secondly, I don't know if we want to create robots with emotions. We have a term for people who can't feel. They're called sociopaths.
However, I'm just as interested as the next slashdotter to see how brilliant this failure will be.
Maybe the movie industry will bust like the dotcoms did. I know this is a bit of wishful thinking. But is this possible? Most movies don't even break even at the domestic box office anymore. They have to make their money via foriegn audiences, DVD sales, and video rentals. The industry is dying because the business model is rapidly changing.
One of the first lessons of finance is that it's better to invest $10,000 with low risk in order to make $20,000, than to invest $100 million to make $150 million with high risk.
I think the only reason people invest in Hollywood is because the industry has "sex appeal". So if your Howard Hughes, or some other rich millionaire playboy you can invest in movies, race horses, or casinos. However, maybe, the big business of entertainment is starting to die in this country.
Most of us work in an industry that is obsessed with resumes.
It isn't the credentials, it's the person. I've worked with idiots with degrees and I've met geniuses without them. However, most people with advanced degrees in engineering or science tend to be pretty smart. I've never met a stupid physicist. I never met a stupid PhD engineer.
I've met too many people who go to college to get a piece of paper. I love to teach myself, and even I am now engaged in the pursuit of paper. Yet again american business engages in an unhealthy business activity. The problem of someone being underemployed in a syptom of the requirement of worthless certification. Wow, what a shock!
Who was better Tesla or Edison? How about self educated people like Farnsworth? Who's OS is/was better and in what way? Was it Gates, Torvalds, Kildall?
My advice is this: If you're pursuing a PhD and you happen to be studying a subject matter that is actually used SOMEWHERE in industry, try going to an industry confrence and shop around. Try networking. If your studying Statistics and you've got computer skills, find a data mining conference. Find people in industry who have a similar background and are active in writing publications and email them. You'll run into a lot of closed doors, but a few will open up. Even if your PhD is in an arcane subject like mathematical logic or astrophysics. You still have job skills. Most logicians go into the computer industry (usually in advanced development positions). Most astrophysicts hock there applied modeling skills. Don't expect the jobs to come to you. Look for them. Incidently I hope you all don't follow my advice. It just makes it easier for me.
I hate to get on my soapbox, but this is Slashdot and it's a slow article. Incidentally, the first half of my post is a relevant rant and the second half is my deduced idea. Ever in the Slashdot tradition, I delimit my rant in non-W3C compliant XML for all of you.
/ I'm one of the many dot com layoffs. I returned to school to finish my degree. In doing so, I've been getting by as a contract programmer. It's not stable so I've had to pick up some side work. However, most non-tech businesses won't even touch me. Ever try getting a job at a wal-mart when your last salary was twice the store manager. I tend to water down my background on those applications, but they won't even look at me. So, I've been working some pretty ugly labor-intensive temp work. My co-workers (and bosses) are severely uneducated. I'm not trying to be arrogant. It's just a fact. A couple of them are quite bright, but they never applied themselves.
For instance, one coworker who I've become friends with is a perfect example. He has quite a bit of street smarts. I think he has a lot of potential. He even had a chance to go to college on a football scholarship. However, he somehow has it pounded into his head that school is impractical or completely unnecessary. (Of course given the state of urban American high schools.....) All of his plans are nothing but a bunch of get rich quick schemes. They also have a fair amount of holes in them as well. I think he also had trouble in school. However, he's been taking classes at a local community college and his grades have vastly improved.
I'm pretty much a self-taught kind of guy. On the one hand, I think college is somewhat just a piece of paper. However, I realize the relevance of that paper in attaining a job. It's an unfortunate but necessary certification. We live in an age of watered down and proliferated certification. On the other hand, I'm probably more self-educated that the average person. When I was younger I spent quite a bit time acquiring books (on the cheap) on everything from computers, mathematics, physics, etc. I didn't even own a computer as a kid and had a bit of a steep learning curve in my first CS course. I can only imagine the digital divide is even worse. The guy I mentioned earlier wants to learn about computers. So I'm plan on helping him set up a home network with some older PCs I'm picking up at a local surplus auction. I'll introduce him to Linux. Maybe I even try to get him to learn a little about electronics and build a radio. Even if he doesn't plan to study CS, Math, or EE etc, hopefully he'll gain some insight in how to solve problems and think in a more analytical way. Hopefully he'll pick up a few job skills as well. /
Here's my idea. Try finding a community center and teach a class in programming or networking. Not a stupid intro to the web/HTML class. Offer a serious course. Get the students to open up a few machines. Set up a LAN. Throw a LAN party at the end [run Quake if the machines are too old]. Trust me, if you go to a real inner city neighborhood, they probably won't own high-end PCs anyway. Most colleges and gov't agencies sell old PCs in bulk at low rates. DON'T TEACH TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR. Try the Feynman approach. Make it challenging and throw hooks that will catch the interest of your listeners. Raise the standards of the students. Sure, some will get bored, confused, or drop out. However, there will be those one or two students who will get hooked. This is why public schools SUCK in this country. Always lowering the standards to meet the needs of the worst students. Apparently the average EdD hasn't hard of Zeno's Paradox. Let's reduce our education to an infinitesimal level. Great idea!! Anyway, personally I'd love to design a GPL type collection of books to introduce CS.
Imagine trying to convey the world of 2003 to the a young man alive in 1903 (like Strum Thurmond). Imagine explaining relativity, quantum mechanics, cloning, nuculear power, space flight and so on. How about trying to explain just a simple microwave?
In a world that may one day provide us with quantum teleportation (and all of it's crazy implications to cloning, travel, "replication", etc), nanotechnology, and true AI. How can we even predict what the world will be like? [Some people have even given this psuedoscience a formal name - economics.]
Frankly, all the problems listed above deal with the same fundamental mathematical problem that biology is facing. It's the problem of complexity caused by massive parallelism. Solve a small selection of mathematical problems and the world will see unprecedented progress. Imagine the power of calculus squared. No, I'm not worried about overpopulation or becoming the slave of some robot. The law of unintended consequences seems to work everything out. Frankly, if we ever have that kind of power over science, goods will become so cheap we won't even notice the economic impacts. Sure, some people will sit around all day and watch television (or live in the matrix, etc). However, there will still be a few geeks. People who like to tinker and see how far they can make things go.
Think about life in the 1900's. Most of us don't have to sweat as much at our jobs. You think a cubicle is rough. Try a sweat shop. Try working at a cotton mill. Life has improved because of science. Human civilization has a habit of adapting to change.
We are losing are jobs to India because we've closed immigration in this country. Please here me out on this.
Employers have been taking it out on H1-B visas for a while. They treat them like slave labor. So guess what, these guys go back to their home countries and lure our greedy corporations to throw some business their way. We closed immigration in this country because we've created a system of "entitlements" that we can't afford to offer to most of our low paying immigrants (i.e. like Mexican laborers in California). These social programs are draining the system. We shut down our immigration. Also our corporate masters manage to convince Washington (via lobbyists) that there's a "shortage" of technically skilled people in the US. So there is a feast on cheap H1-B visa (read indentured servant) labor in this country. Instead of having all of these H1-B's becoming highly skilled, highly paid American citizens who contribute taxes to our economy and are paid at a fair market value (thus not screwing us American geeks), we for some reason (ignorantly) believe that closing our borders (and putting our heads in the sand [or somewhere else]) is going to solve the problem. We need to open immigration in this country. We need to strike a balance between sensible social programs and reasonable tax laws in this country. We need to wake up before the Kenny Lays of this world put the screw to our wonderful American economy.
If I could recommend one book on economics, please read "Wealth of Nations". I don't care what your ideology is. Our country embodies the notions found in this book.
From a political stand point this is almost a non-issue. The difference is that music is a BIG industry. Most of the piracy that takes place occurs with technical literature. Even if all of the publishers got together, and complained about rampant piracy, no one would care. Why? Because BIG BOOK doesn't have enough lobbyists on capital hill to make a fuss about it. The kind of book publishers with enough pull to compain are probably already attached to the music and movie industry anyway. There's also the great irony that a few authors might actually appreciate the spread of literacy even if it is through illegitimate means. Libraries exist to provide legal and free access to literature. Libraries exist to promote and advance the spread of knowlege through reading. Geeks like libraries.
Another reason this is a non-issue:
The music industry isn't really loosing customers because of music pirating. I don't pirate and I don't buy contemporary music CDs too often. Why? Because the AOLTIMEWARNERBRITTNEYSPEARSN'SYNCPREFAB music SUCKS! Maybe if you improved the content I would buy some modern music CDs. We don't have a modern day equivelent of Elvis and the Beattles. The publishing industry doesn't have an issue with content. People don't "wear" literature like fashion. In fact, it has become quite fashionable to be incompetent and illiterate. So the next time some one complains about the fact that the poor music and movie industry is losing money because of pirating, just point out that the reality is that they may be losing money because the content is rapidly becoming non-existant.
Let's firm that argument a bit. When I watch a television channel, I engage in an unwritten agreement (that's implied verbal consent, not expressed written consent:) ) that I am taking responsibility for all content viewed. When I open my email, I'm never given a chance to opt-out or opt-in. I am given no chance to decide. You know what channels are on your television before you turn it on (or you could find out). You have no idea what kind of email you've recieved without opening it. Also, television shows with explicit content have to warn their viewers. Most emails with explicit content, hide their deviance (albeit lamely) and even try to convience their readers of having other innocent intentions.
Wow, I just talked like a lawyer. I feel dirty now. Dirty, like I just read some spam! What, I'm being served a notice by Hormel for my use of the word spam! I need a shower now!
All it took was one look at the headline and I could imagine all of the jokes . However, let's look at reality. If you're a real bonafide sysadmin, you're probably going to have to deal with Windows.
I remember at one point I was having to write some VB code. It was during the dot com boom. There where certainly jobs for C++/Java people. However, there was a real demand for VB COM programmers. So I figured, I should at least take a look and try to figure out how the dark side works. Of course my first idea was to go around the office and ask if anyone had ever heard of a VB book for C++/Java programmers. (Actually I did run across a VB for COBOL programmers.) The immediate response was chuckles and outright laughter. Of course, my smart ass smirk probably didn't help. Anyway, there was a book that dove that deeply into VB. It was "Hardcore Visual Basic". There where a couple of good O'Reilly books as well. (As an ironic side note, the author stopped updating the book because he got so sick of microsoft abusing a perfectly good RAD tool).
Yes, programming a glorified GUI sucks. Yes, you're ultimately going to cut and paste and cleverly misuse the IDE when you write code. Yes, VB is a painful. It like trying to ride a tricycle when you've got a Harley in the garage. However, most of the world runs Microsoft products and from time to time I have to work with Windows. So I getting sick of the snide comments. The submitter is definitely NOT A TROLL! I don't claim to be a hacker or an ubergeek but I'm kind of sick of the unprofessional nature of the Slashdot crowd.
So, my best advice is that you take a look at some of the O'Reilly books and stroll through some of the reviews at Amazon. Let their data miners do the work for you.
Foundations and Fundamental Concepts of Mathematics
Howard Whitley Eves
The first book is really an excellent crash course survey of "adavanced mathematics", topology, logic, analysis, and matrix theory. It's was designed around a course for adult students taught by the author. The second is slightly more rigourous in a similar vein. Both are Dover books. I've also submitted another post about some other books down below.
I know people swear by Godel Escher and Bach, but I got bored and couldn't read the whole thing. This coming from a guy whose spent years studying mathematics and read many a dry text (and actually enjoyed it) on mathematical logic.
For a popular science account on logic and computability:
Godel's Proof
by Ernest Nagel, James Roy Newman
The Universal Computer: The Road from Leibniz to Turing
by Martin Davis
anything by Raymond Smullyan
Incidently, I believe Godel's Proof is the book that Hofstadler initially read. Martin Davis and Raymond Smullyan are two well respected mathematical logicians in there own right.
A couple of physics books I liked were:
Mr Tompkins in Paperback : Comprising 'Mr Tompkins in Wonderland' and 'Mr Tompkins Explores the Atom'
by George Gamow
Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy
by Kip S. Thorne
anything by Richard Feynman
I also liked:
New Turing Omnibus (New Turning Omnibus: 66 Excursions in Computer Science)
by A. K. Dewdney
(it isn't quite a textbook, but too too rigorous to be popular science)
also take a look at Rudy Rucker's books (another logician who deals with Hyperspace and geometry in several of his books) also a sci-fi author to boot
Slashdot Mirror
First, I know this is OT. However, it's as OT as the rest of posts....
This reminds me about an interview Richard Feynman gave a long time ago. It was after he finished working at Los Alamos. He was depressed. Everywhere he went, he couldn't understand why people were building things anymore. He had just spent the last 4 years helping build the most destructive weapon known to man. He was sure the world was going to end any day now. Safe to say, he was wrong. We've had apocolyptic doomsayers for a long time. The world didn't end in 1944. It didn't end over Cuba. It hasn't ended over the middle-east. Look, I know there are priorities. However, your post could randomly apply to anything. Certianly death and war is more important than games, the California election, movies, sports, and most everything else.
My guess is that your depressed about something else. So for whatever it is worth, I stop worrying about the world along time ago. I've learned to hate all politicians equally, let vocal religious extremists argue among themselves, and I don't have a preference for the spelling of the word flavor/flavour.
While most of these "new media" (it's not so NEW anymore) theorists make me puke. The only thing worse than a "new media" theorist, is a wannabe "new media" theorist.
I find Chris Crawford to be an exception. Maybe it's because he's actually designed games and he was good at it. If Mr. Crawford writes an 11 part series I might read it.
That's all folks!
Why doesn't somebody publish a book of proprietary to open-source case studies? I mean a detailed how-to book. Collect a bunch of articles with real-life case studies of these solutions. Include some technical details and a business-speak analysis at the end.
It sure beats another PHPMYSQLLINUXIN5MINUTES book. Please don't write another intro to PHP/MySQL and web publishing book. We really don't need it.
Try smoking. Oh wait they do that in IT as well.
People will always find ways to "slack off" at work. Although, it's impossible to be 100% productive all the time. Frankly, I wish more employers would state reasonable standards of productivity and just worry about employees meeting those standards. I know people would abuse that too.
I've seen completely lazy people, and I've seen bosses who micromanage. So it really goes both ways.
I know this is slightly off-topic. In a system that gives us leaders like Strom Thurmond, William Byrd, Ted Kennedy, and Ernest Hollings, how is the California re-election bad? Have you ever watched C-SPAN? Those guys aren't even cohorent. Heck, I'd say there sometimes comatose. It's almost as fun as Slashdot!
I know the situation isn't the same. However, it is an interesting thought. Will we ever get so sick of IP law, that we will stage a modern day Boston Tea Party? Even if we don't, it makes for an interesting look at my country's revolution.
Another interesting point is that the British felt the taxes imposed were legitimate given the cost of the French and Indian War.
I think the problem is with the nature of modern computer industry hiring process. Thanks to monster, head hunters, and the dot com bust the industry has turned into a meat market. Gee, let's ask 100 questions about some API. That's really going to help me judge a person's programming ability. The average PhD in CS isn't going to rush to the mall to read the SAMS UNLEASHED/O'REILLY/WAITE GROUP PRESS book. Hopefully, they read Dr. Dobbs and some other professional journals. I wonder what the average interviewer thinks of Knuth, Dijkstra, or Minsky. Yeah there's a lot of worthless knowledge in The Art of Computer Programming. I mean, who needs to write an algorithm anymore. I'm sure they don't have any practical skills.
I wish there was more emphasis on sample code and past projects or work experience. However, my experience is that most of the screening/interview process is a glorified grep on my resume and a couple pendantic questions about some really tedious aspect. Look I've played the IT game for a while. I suppose it gets better for more serious engineers. However, I've heard it really doesn't.
Incidently, my favorite related tidbit was when our development team was faced with a NP hard problem and one of the programmers brushed off such worthless "theoretical" issues by saying, "Oh I know QuickSort". Which is real funny since we where dealing with an optimization problem.
Here's the problem with this discussion. Intelligence is more than just processing power. It's more than just statistics. You need to be able to feel to function as a human. (I understand the irony of posting this on slashdot.) When you touch something and hurt yourself you learn. When you see a pretty girl and the dopamine kicks in, your motivated. Frankly, the mathematics and engineering is trivial. We just don't have a "full map of the human physiology". In order to create a robot slave who doesn't mind being a slave, yet retains the intelligence to be useful, is probably not possible.
Secondly, I don't know if we want to create robots with emotions. We have a term for people who can't feel. They're called sociopaths.
However, I'm just as interested as the next slashdotter to see how brilliant this failure will be.
Maybe the movie industry will bust like the dotcoms did. I know this is a bit of wishful thinking. But is this possible? Most movies don't even break even at the domestic box office anymore. They have to make their money via foriegn audiences, DVD sales, and video rentals. The industry is dying because the business model is rapidly changing.
One of the first lessons of finance is that it's better to invest $10,000 with low risk in order to make $20,000, than to invest $100 million to make $150 million with high risk.
I think the only reason people invest in Hollywood is because the industry has "sex appeal". So if your Howard Hughes, or some other rich millionaire playboy you can invest in movies, race horses, or casinos. However, maybe, the big business of entertainment is starting to die in this country.
Most of us work in an industry that is obsessed with resumes.
It isn't the credentials, it's the person. I've worked with idiots with degrees and I've met geniuses without them. However, most people with advanced degrees in engineering or science tend to be pretty smart. I've never met a stupid physicist. I never met a stupid PhD engineer.
I've met too many people who go to college to get a piece of paper. I love to teach myself, and even I am now engaged in the pursuit of paper. Yet again american business engages in an unhealthy business activity. The problem of someone being underemployed in a syptom of the requirement of worthless certification. Wow, what a shock!
Who was better Tesla or Edison? How about self educated people like Farnsworth? Who's OS is/was better and in what way? Was it Gates, Torvalds, Kildall?
My advice is this: If you're pursuing a PhD and you happen to be studying a subject matter that is actually used SOMEWHERE in industry, try going to an industry confrence and shop around. Try networking. If your studying Statistics and you've got computer skills, find a data mining conference. Find people in industry who have a similar background and are active in writing publications and email them. You'll run into a lot of closed doors, but a few will open up. Even if your PhD is in an arcane subject like mathematical logic or astrophysics. You still have job skills. Most logicians go into the computer industry (usually in advanced development positions). Most astrophysicts hock there applied modeling skills. Don't expect the jobs to come to you. Look for them. Incidently I hope you all don't follow my advice. It just makes it easier for me.
Sorry!
I hate to get on my soapbox, but this is Slashdot and it's a slow article. Incidentally, the first half of my post is a relevant rant and the second half is my deduced idea. Ever in the Slashdot tradition, I delimit my rant in non-W3C compliant XML for all of you.
/
I'm one of the many dot com layoffs. I returned to school to finish my degree. In doing so, I've been getting by as a contract programmer. It's not stable so I've had to pick up some side work. However, most non-tech businesses won't even touch me. Ever try getting a job at a wal-mart when your last salary was twice the store manager. I tend to water down my background on those applications, but they won't even look at me. So, I've been working some pretty ugly labor-intensive temp work. My co-workers (and bosses) are severely uneducated. I'm not trying to be arrogant. It's just a fact. A couple of them are quite bright, but they never applied themselves.
For instance, one coworker who I've become friends with is a perfect example. He has quite a bit of street smarts. I think he has a lot of potential. He even had a chance to go to college on a football scholarship. However, he somehow has it pounded into his head that school is impractical or completely unnecessary. (Of course given the state of urban American high schools.....) All of his plans are nothing but a bunch of get rich quick schemes. They also have a fair amount of holes in them as well. I think he also had trouble in school. However, he's been taking classes at a local community college and his grades have vastly improved.
I'm pretty much a self-taught kind of guy. On the one hand, I think college is somewhat just a piece of paper. However, I realize the relevance of that paper in attaining a job. It's an unfortunate but necessary certification. We live in an age of watered down and proliferated certification. On the other hand, I'm probably more self-educated that the average person. When I was younger I spent quite a bit time acquiring books (on the cheap) on everything from computers, mathematics, physics, etc. I didn't even own a computer as a kid and had a bit of a steep learning curve in my first CS course.
I can only imagine the digital divide is even worse. The guy I mentioned earlier wants to learn about computers. So I'm plan on helping him set up a home network with some older PCs I'm picking up at a local surplus auction. I'll introduce him to Linux. Maybe I even try to get him to learn a little about electronics and build a radio. Even if he doesn't plan to study CS, Math, or EE etc, hopefully he'll gain some insight in how to solve problems and think in a more analytical way. Hopefully he'll pick up a few job skills as well.
/
Here's my idea. Try finding a community center and teach a class in programming or networking. Not a stupid intro to the web/HTML class. Offer a serious course. Get the students to open up a few machines. Set up a LAN. Throw a LAN party at the end [run Quake if the machines are too old]. Trust me, if you go to a real inner city neighborhood, they probably won't own high-end PCs anyway. Most colleges and gov't agencies sell old PCs in bulk at low rates. DON'T TEACH TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR. Try the Feynman approach. Make it challenging and throw hooks that will catch the interest of your listeners. Raise the standards of the students. Sure, some will get bored, confused, or drop out. However, there will be those one or two students who will get hooked. This is why public schools SUCK in this country. Always lowering the standards to meet the needs of the worst students. Apparently the average EdD hasn't hard of Zeno's Paradox. Let's reduce our education to an infinitesimal level. Great idea!! Anyway, personally I'd love to design a GPL type collection of books to introduce CS.
Imagine trying to convey the world of 2003 to the a young man alive in 1903 (like Strum Thurmond). Imagine explaining relativity, quantum mechanics, cloning, nuculear power, space flight and so on. How about trying to explain just a simple microwave?
In a world that may one day provide us with quantum teleportation (and all of it's crazy implications to cloning, travel, "replication", etc), nanotechnology, and true AI. How can we even predict what the world will be like? [Some people have even given this psuedoscience a formal name - economics.]
Frankly, all the problems listed above deal with the same fundamental mathematical problem that biology is facing. It's the problem of complexity caused by massive parallelism. Solve a small selection of mathematical problems and the world will see unprecedented progress. Imagine the power of calculus squared. No, I'm not worried about overpopulation or becoming the slave of some robot. The law of unintended consequences seems to work everything out. Frankly, if we ever have that kind of power over science, goods will become so cheap we won't even notice the economic impacts. Sure, some people will sit around all day and watch television (or live in the matrix, etc). However, there will still be a few geeks. People who like to tinker and see how far they can make things go.
Think about life in the 1900's. Most of us don't have to sweat as much at our jobs. You think a cubicle is rough. Try a sweat shop. Try working at a cotton mill. Life has improved because of science. Human civilization has a habit of adapting to change.
We are losing are jobs to India because we've closed immigration in this country. Please here me out on this.
Employers have been taking it out on H1-B visas for a while. They treat them like slave labor. So guess what, these guys go back to their home countries and lure our greedy corporations to throw some business their way. We closed immigration in this country because we've created a system of "entitlements" that we can't afford to offer to most of our low paying immigrants (i.e. like Mexican laborers in California). These social programs are draining the system. We shut down our immigration. Also our corporate masters manage to convince Washington (via lobbyists) that there's a "shortage" of technically skilled people in the US. So there is a feast on cheap H1-B visa (read indentured servant) labor in this country. Instead of having all of these H1-B's becoming highly skilled, highly paid American citizens who contribute taxes to our economy and are paid at a fair market value (thus not screwing us American geeks), we for some reason (ignorantly) believe that closing our borders (and putting our heads in the sand [or somewhere else]) is going to solve the problem. We need to open immigration in this country. We need to strike a balance between sensible social programs and reasonable tax laws in this country. We need to wake up before the Kenny Lays of this world put the screw to our wonderful American economy.
If I could recommend one book on economics, please read "Wealth of Nations". I don't care what your ideology is. Our country embodies the notions found in this book.
From a political stand point this is almost a non-issue. The difference is that music is a BIG industry. Most of the piracy that takes place occurs with technical literature. Even if all of the publishers got together, and complained about rampant piracy, no one would care. Why? Because BIG BOOK doesn't have enough lobbyists on capital hill to make a fuss about it. The kind of book publishers with enough pull to compain are probably already attached to the music and movie industry anyway. There's also the great irony that a few authors might actually appreciate the spread of literacy even if it is through illegitimate means. Libraries exist to provide legal and free access to literature. Libraries exist to promote and advance the spread of knowlege through reading. Geeks like libraries.
Another reason this is a non-issue:
The music industry isn't really loosing customers because of music pirating. I don't pirate and I don't buy contemporary music CDs too often. Why? Because the AOLTIMEWARNERBRITTNEYSPEARSN'SYNCPREFAB music SUCKS! Maybe if you improved the content I would buy some modern music CDs. We don't have a modern day equivelent of Elvis and the Beattles. The publishing industry doesn't have an issue with content. People don't "wear" literature like fashion. In fact, it has become quite fashionable to be incompetent and illiterate. So the next time some one complains about the fact that the poor music and movie industry is losing money because of pirating, just point out that the reality is that they may be losing money because the content is rapidly becoming non-existant.
Let's firm that argument a bit. When I watch a television channel, I engage in an unwritten agreement (that's implied verbal consent, not expressed written consent :) ) that I am taking responsibility for all content viewed. When I open my email, I'm never given a chance to opt-out or opt-in. I am given no chance to decide. You know what channels are on your television before you turn it on (or you could find out). You have no idea what kind of email you've recieved without opening it. Also, television shows with explicit content have to warn their viewers. Most emails with explicit content, hide their deviance (albeit lamely) and even try to convience their readers of having other innocent intentions.
Wow, I just talked like a lawyer. I feel dirty now. Dirty, like I just read some spam! What, I'm being served a notice by Hormel for my use of the word spam! I need a shower now!
All it took was one look at the headline and I could imagine all of the jokes . However, let's look at reality. If you're a real bonafide sysadmin, you're probably going to have to deal with Windows.
I remember at one point I was having to write some VB code. It was during the dot com boom. There where certainly jobs for C++/Java people. However, there was a real demand for VB COM programmers. So I figured, I should at least take a look and try to figure out how the dark side works. Of course my first idea was to go around the office and ask if anyone had ever heard of a VB book for C++/Java programmers. (Actually I did run across a VB for COBOL programmers.) The immediate response was chuckles and outright laughter. Of course, my smart ass smirk probably didn't help. Anyway, there was a book that dove that deeply into VB. It was "Hardcore Visual Basic". There where a couple of good O'Reilly books as well. (As an ironic side note, the author stopped updating the book because he got so sick of microsoft abusing a perfectly good RAD tool).
Yes, programming a glorified GUI sucks. Yes, you're ultimately going to cut and paste and cleverly misuse the IDE when you write code. Yes, VB is a painful. It like trying to ride a tricycle when you've got a Harley in the garage. However, most of the world runs Microsoft products and from time to time I have to work with Windows. So I getting sick of the snide comments. The submitter is definitely NOT A TROLL! I don't claim to be a hacker or an ubergeek but I'm kind of sick of the unprofessional nature of the Slashdot crowd.
So, my best advice is that you take a look at some of the O'Reilly books and stroll through some of the reviews at Amazon. Let their data miners do the work for you.
Try:
Concepts of Modern Mathematics
by Ian Stewart
and
Foundations and Fundamental Concepts of Mathematics
Howard Whitley Eves
The first book is really an excellent crash course survey of "adavanced mathematics", topology, logic, analysis, and matrix theory. It's was designed around a course for adult students taught by the author. The second is slightly more rigourous in a similar vein. Both are Dover books. I've also submitted another post about some other books down below.
I know people swear by Godel Escher and Bach, but I got bored and couldn't read the whole thing. This coming from a guy whose spent years studying mathematics and read many a dry text (and actually enjoyed it) on mathematical logic.
For a popular science account on logic and computability:
Godel's Proof
by Ernest Nagel, James Roy Newman
The Universal Computer: The Road from Leibniz to Turing
by Martin Davis
anything by Raymond Smullyan
Incidently, I believe Godel's Proof is the book that Hofstadler initially read. Martin Davis and Raymond Smullyan are two well respected mathematical logicians in there own right.
A couple of physics books I liked were:
Mr Tompkins in Paperback : Comprising 'Mr Tompkins in Wonderland' and 'Mr Tompkins Explores the Atom'
by George Gamow
Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy
by Kip S. Thorne
anything by Richard Feynman
I also liked:
New Turing Omnibus (New Turning Omnibus: 66 Excursions in Computer Science)
by A. K. Dewdney
(it isn't quite a textbook, but too too rigorous to be popular science)
also take a look at Rudy Rucker's books (another logician who deals with Hyperspace and geometry in several of his books) also a sci-fi author to boot