Most of my professors had no real world experience, either. So, teaching things like team dynamics and working within a project schedule were really beyond their expertise. Granted, I've been quite successful, but I attribute most of that to my abilities, not what I learned in college. College just got me a piece of paper that opened the door.
This is why I'm thankful I basically flunked out of the CS program at Penn State and went into their IST program. I got a much more well-rounded education, learning everything from database normalization to computer networking to web app programming and XML integration. They usually let us use the languages and applications we felt most comfortable with.
Because of this, I am able to do pretty much everything from debugging Perl to setting up a database to writing a shell script to hardcore coding. (Right now I'm working on Fitnesse fixtures in Java.) And those folks in CS programs? They keep coming to me to fix their computers. They've got a great theoretical knowledge, but little working knowledge.
Yes, but peak electrical energy use is during the day, and the yearly peak is in the summer. So putting solar panels on a lot of roofs all connected to the grid would help reduce our fossil fuel use and make it easier on the power plants since it takes a lot of work to vary their power output. And it will help prevent brownouts.
And if you get paid for the electricity you feed back into the grid, you could significantly reduce or eliminate your electricity bill. And once you've got the solar panels, adding a few batteries and a charge controller would be a great way to make a UPS for a couple rooms in your house.
You're exactly right! I also don't understand why we don't let timber companies cut down every tree in Yellowstone. Don't they own part of it, too? Shouldn't they be allowed to cut down trees they own?
If you could get the content of textbooks or other reference materials for $10 as opposed to the $100+ that they typically cost it would pay for itself in a typical college semester
Do you really think that you're paying $100 for the physical artifact when you buy a textbook? You're really just paying what the publisher can get away with because everyone has to buy it.
Go to a normal bookstore and look at the prices for books that are the same size and weight as textbooks. They're all around $50 or $60.
Do I want to know if they have a clue about what E=mc2 means? No.. I really don't care.
You might not care, but I'd like someone who is in charge of the Executive branch of government to be at least as smart as I am. I don't use E=mc^2 in my job, but I at least know what it means.
Knowing something that is not directly applicable to your vocation or avocation shows a level of intellectual curiousity that I expect in someone who has to make complicated decisions.
Whether they are scientists or not, they are making statements that they cannot back up.
Is that the believers or the non-believers.
All I ever say is that I've yet to see sufficient evidence to make the case for the existence of a god. If your standard of evidence is less rigorous, so be it.
But don't go around, like so many believers do, saying that those who do not believe in god are somehow immoral.
However, if the creation had a purpose, then understanding that purpose might make living in and understanding our world easier.
If a god existed, and its creation did have a purpose, why disguise the purpose? Why not have it explicitly available to all sentient beings?
Specifically these acts might take the form of inspiring prophets who can, amidst their ravings (a natural consequence of being touched by God, I would assume) reveal something of the purpose of God.
If a god existed and wanted to communicate its purpose, why would it make it amidst the rantings of madmen? Why not give it to everyone? Why make the transmission of the purpose cause madness? For an omnipotent being this is, like everything else, trivial.
If an omnipotent being was truly omnibenevolent, and knowing the purpose of the universe or our own existence made our lives better and let us spend eternity in paradise, why wouldn't such a being communicate this purpose clearly and explicitly to everyone?
Far better to let God dissolve, like sugar in water, invisible but still there. A sort of carrier signal for reality. But then I guess you wouldn't have much of a foundation for bashing gays.
I've seen two main arguments for where god fits in a modern, scientific understanding of the universe. The first is "Well, science is just wrong," and the second is much like what you're proposing.
My question is, if god is indistinguishable from natural events, why even assume it exists? It makes it seem like the difference between god existing and god not existing is just a warm fuzzy feeling. And if I want that I can go hold my newborn daughter.
(And please don't come back with that old "God is what you feel when you hold your newborn daughter" crap.)
She insisted though and after almost getting into an argument with her I told her that if she felt she had to pay me then she could pay me a gratuity in whatever amount made her happy. Her husband suggested $25. She asked me if that was enough. I told her it was more than enough so she wrote me a check for $25.
I usually say "Pay me what you think my services are worth." Since most people think that it's harder than it actually is, I get a good return, and they feel happy about paying me.
Besides, isn't it a good capitalist who lets the consumer set the price for goods?
I pay a penny per kilobyte and a nickel per text message, simply because it's so hard to use on my phone and so slow that I never use it for anything other than emergencies. Maybe if I had a phone that didn't make the Internet a bear to use I'd buy an unlimited EDGE service. Granted, this is a gripe more about the phones than about the system, but it's valid.
And I agree that the contract model and phone lock-in are broken. Unfortunately, we've got three big, entrenched carriers and nobody seems to want to change the model.
As to the Left, the hippy stuff just bugs me that all. I don't like drum circles nuff said.
So the only reason you're not a lefty is because of some ridiculous notion that we're all a bunch of treehuggers who smell like peyote and have drum circles?
I think libertarians thought for themselves, not swallowed the right-wing noise machine's stereotypes.
Watch it over the air with a lot of static. Watch it in a 2" window on a jittery stream on NBC.com. Wait a year for it to come out on DVD and religiously avoid spoilers. Yeah, really equivalent options.
All I can say is that I'm glad I got DVR when I did. With a new baby on the way there's no way I'll be able to schedule my life around TV shows. And, if I have to, I'll "steal" the content they won't let me pay for. I've bought episodes of BSG and Heroes that I've missed. I guess they don't want my money.
My superpower says they're going to get a nasty letter from me in the near future.
The main problem I see with the scenario is that if you don't have electricity, internet access becomes a secondary (tertiary? more-ary?) issue. Get some fridges running first and get clean drinking water, care about pr0n later
I'm planning on getting an inverter and hooking my fridge up to it, and water is provided by the city, so there's going to be pressure as long as there's water in the tower.
It's really a first-world problem I'm solving: When the power goes out I get bored. I've got a laptop which is good for a couple hours, but what to do with it if there's no net access?
Any artificial life without that pedigree is going to be... disadvantaged.
I think you mean "breakfast."
I've often thought about doing this small-scale
on
Solar Powered Wi-Fi
·
· Score: 1
One thing I noticed about all my LAN widgets (modem, router, Vonage box and Slingbox) is that they run on 12V DC. Since most solar panels output 12V DC that is used to charge 12V storage batteries, shouldn't it be relatively easy to get that hooked up? You wouldn't even need an inverter, just connect the 12V DC power source to the equipment.
I personally hate the mac interface; it's too bubbly and I can't find anything. I prefer the look and most (actual) features of XP set to the "classic" style. Now, MS could do a much better job with implementation and security and all that, but for the most part I like the interface.
A lot of guys at work have gotten Mac Book Pros for testing sites and working from home and they have the same complaint at first. Then they actually USE the system for a week, they get used to it and don't want to switch back to their Windows box.
And I don't really like the Finder either, which is why I use Quicksilver.
I somehow managed to kill it within five minutes of using that computer for the first time.
When was this? OS 9 was famously unstable, especially if you had extension conflicts. OS X is rock solid, and has gotten even moreso over the past few years. I had a Power Mac G4 that I turned on the first day of college that stayed up 24/7 from September to May.
Third, huge urban sprawl is an ecological nightmare. The government needs to provide incentives to redistribute populations on a wider geographic basis. Not having access to basic business infrastructure makes this very very hard.
I think you're wrong there.
Most people who live in Manhattan use fewer resources and walk more than people who live in the suburbs. The real problem isn't urban life, but suburban life. By putting everything far away from everything else, you encourage people to drive. And by making people drive, you have to pave more for roads and parking spaces. Not only that, but you also have to account for the increased energy needed to distribute goods over those long distances.
All other things being equal, urbanization is better for the environment as a whole than suburbanization. Indeed, people who live in urban environments are healthier than those who live in suburban or rural areas. And a well-designed urban area, with walkable stores, reliable mass transit, and well-maintained parks is a joy to live in.
I should know, I live in one. (But I still can't get good broadband!)
As population density drops outside of metropolitan areas, it's impossible for telecommunications companies or cable service providers to justify the tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars per mile it can cost to bring fiber to every rural community, let alone every home
This is a valid reason. But can anyone think why I can't get FiOS, even though I only paid $20,000 less for my house than my mother-in-law did for hers, and even though I live in an upscale neighborhood of a city of 75,000 people? And I'm less than 3/10 of a mile from the CO and the neighborhood is home to a lot of college kids.
Because I sure can't understand this.
And as for the guy who's 3/10 of a mile from the nearest cable internet connection, he should pay the person who lives there for the connection and then install a solar-powered, battery-backed up repeater halfway in between and just run Ethernet. It's a rural area, and I've seen stranger things.
Sadly, this is very true. If I, for example, really voted my conscience, I'd have to vote Green. Now, that's one less vote for the Democrats, which weakens them. If enough people on the far left vote Green or Socialist or something, it significantly weakens the position of the left-of-center party so that the right-of-center party wins the election. And since they're opposed to positions that I'm in favor of, I'm usually voting against the Republicans rather than for anyone.
The only way you'll ever have a system where people can vote their hopes instead of their fears is if we get rid of this ridiculous notion of winner-takes-all elections.
Slashdot Mirror
This is why I'm thankful I basically flunked out of the CS program at Penn State and went into their IST program. I got a much more well-rounded education, learning everything from database normalization to computer networking to web app programming and XML integration. They usually let us use the languages and applications we felt most comfortable with.
Because of this, I am able to do pretty much everything from debugging Perl to setting up a database to writing a shell script to hardcore coding. (Right now I'm working on Fitnesse fixtures in Java.) And those folks in CS programs? They keep coming to me to fix their computers. They've got a great theoretical knowledge, but little working knowledge.
My point is that if people made buying decisions with less emotional influences they'd make better choices.
Or we could ask people to make decisions about car buying with their pre-frontal cortex and not their amygdala.
Yes, but peak electrical energy use is during the day, and the yearly peak is in the summer. So putting solar panels on a lot of roofs all connected to the grid would help reduce our fossil fuel use and make it easier on the power plants since it takes a lot of work to vary their power output. And it will help prevent brownouts.
And if you get paid for the electricity you feed back into the grid, you could significantly reduce or eliminate your electricity bill. And once you've got the solar panels, adding a few batteries and a charge controller would be a great way to make a UPS for a couple rooms in your house.
You're exactly right! I also don't understand why we don't let timber companies cut down every tree in Yellowstone. Don't they own part of it, too? Shouldn't they be allowed to cut down trees they own?
Do you really think that you're paying $100 for the physical artifact when you buy a textbook? You're really just paying what the publisher can get away with because everyone has to buy it.
Go to a normal bookstore and look at the prices for books that are the same size and weight as textbooks. They're all around $50 or $60.
You might not care, but I'd like someone who is in charge of the Executive branch of government to be at least as smart as I am. I don't use E=mc^2 in my job, but I at least know what it means.
Knowing something that is not directly applicable to your vocation or avocation shows a level of intellectual curiousity that I expect in someone who has to make complicated decisions.
Is that the believers or the non-believers.
All I ever say is that I've yet to see sufficient evidence to make the case for the existence of a god. If your standard of evidence is less rigorous, so be it.
But don't go around, like so many believers do, saying that those who do not believe in god are somehow immoral.
If a god existed, and its creation did have a purpose, why disguise the purpose? Why not have it explicitly available to all sentient beings?
If a god existed and wanted to communicate its purpose, why would it make it amidst the rantings of madmen? Why not give it to everyone? Why make the transmission of the purpose cause madness? For an omnipotent being this is, like everything else, trivial.
If an omnipotent being was truly omnibenevolent, and knowing the purpose of the universe or our own existence made our lives better and let us spend eternity in paradise, why wouldn't such a being communicate this purpose clearly and explicitly to everyone?
I've seen two main arguments for where god fits in a modern, scientific understanding of the universe. The first is "Well, science is just wrong," and the second is much like what you're proposing.
My question is, if god is indistinguishable from natural events, why even assume it exists? It makes it seem like the difference between god existing and god not existing is just a warm fuzzy feeling. And if I want that I can go hold my newborn daughter.
(And please don't come back with that old "God is what you feel when you hold your newborn daughter" crap.)
I usually say "Pay me what you think my services are worth." Since most people think that it's harder than it actually is, I get a good return, and they feel happy about paying me.
Besides, isn't it a good capitalist who lets the consumer set the price for goods?
That's why I listen to Slice of Sci Fi to get news about shows I'd like to watch.
I pay a penny per kilobyte and a nickel per text message, simply because it's so hard to use on my phone and so slow that I never use it for anything other than emergencies. Maybe if I had a phone that didn't make the Internet a bear to use I'd buy an unlimited EDGE service. Granted, this is a gripe more about the phones than about the system, but it's valid.
And I agree that the contract model and phone lock-in are broken. Unfortunately, we've got three big, entrenched carriers and nobody seems to want to change the model.
Go home, image your current disk, wipe it and reinstall Vista. Then take it back and have them fix the screen.
Unless they collude with the government to make it legal for them to force you to allow them to use your data for anything they damn well please.
AT&T, I'm looking in your direction.
I'd be happy if I were able to get FiOS at my house. I guess being super-rich has its privileges.
So the only reason you're not a lefty is because of some ridiculous notion that we're all a bunch of treehuggers who smell like peyote and have drum circles?
I think libertarians thought for themselves, not swallowed the right-wing noise machine's stereotypes.
Watch it over the air with a lot of static. Watch it in a 2" window on a jittery stream on NBC.com. Wait a year for it to come out on DVD and religiously avoid spoilers. Yeah, really equivalent options.
All I can say is that I'm glad I got DVR when I did. With a new baby on the way there's no way I'll be able to schedule my life around TV shows. And, if I have to, I'll "steal" the content they won't let me pay for. I've bought episodes of BSG and Heroes that I've missed. I guess they don't want my money.
My superpower says they're going to get a nasty letter from me in the near future.
I'm planning on getting an inverter and hooking my fridge up to it, and water is provided by the city, so there's going to be pressure as long as there's water in the tower.
It's really a first-world problem I'm solving: When the power goes out I get bored. I've got a laptop which is good for a couple hours, but what to do with it if there's no net access?
I think you mean "breakfast."
One thing I noticed about all my LAN widgets (modem, router, Vonage box and Slingbox) is that they run on 12V DC. Since most solar panels output 12V DC that is used to charge 12V storage batteries, shouldn't it be relatively easy to get that hooked up? You wouldn't even need an inverter, just connect the 12V DC power source to the equipment.
If anybody's done this, please let me know.
A lot of guys at work have gotten Mac Book Pros for testing sites and working from home and they have the same complaint at first. Then they actually USE the system for a week, they get used to it and don't want to switch back to their Windows box.
And I don't really like the Finder either, which is why I use Quicksilver.
When was this? OS 9 was famously unstable, especially if you had extension conflicts. OS X is rock solid, and has gotten even moreso over the past few years. I had a Power Mac G4 that I turned on the first day of college that stayed up 24/7 from September to May.
I think you're wrong there.
Most people who live in Manhattan use fewer resources and walk more than people who live in the suburbs. The real problem isn't urban life, but suburban life. By putting everything far away from everything else, you encourage people to drive. And by making people drive, you have to pave more for roads and parking spaces. Not only that, but you also have to account for the increased energy needed to distribute goods over those long distances.
All other things being equal, urbanization is better for the environment as a whole than suburbanization. Indeed, people who live in urban environments are healthier than those who live in suburban or rural areas. And a well-designed urban area, with walkable stores, reliable mass transit, and well-maintained parks is a joy to live in.
I should know, I live in one. (But I still can't get good broadband!)
This is a valid reason. But can anyone think why I can't get FiOS, even though I only paid $20,000 less for my house than my mother-in-law did for hers, and even though I live in an upscale neighborhood of a city of 75,000 people? And I'm less than 3/10 of a mile from the CO and the neighborhood is home to a lot of college kids.
Because I sure can't understand this.
And as for the guy who's 3/10 of a mile from the nearest cable internet connection, he should pay the person who lives there for the connection and then install a solar-powered, battery-backed up repeater halfway in between and just run Ethernet. It's a rural area, and I've seen stranger things.
Sadly, this is very true. If I, for example, really voted my conscience, I'd have to vote Green. Now, that's one less vote for the Democrats, which weakens them. If enough people on the far left vote Green or Socialist or something, it significantly weakens the position of the left-of-center party so that the right-of-center party wins the election. And since they're opposed to positions that I'm in favor of, I'm usually voting against the Republicans rather than for anyone.
The only way you'll ever have a system where people can vote their hopes instead of their fears is if we get rid of this ridiculous notion of winner-takes-all elections.