You mean "torture". Interrogation is the attempt to get information from a prisoner. Torture is the act of causing agony to a prisoner within the context of a poorly-done interrogation.
Well, to name two examples, the King James Bible standardized written English when it was first published, and the Luther Bible standardized written German. While both languages have changed since then, it is perfectly valid to cite the King James Bible to demonstrate that, for instance, the spelling of "judgment" as "judgment" is attested to English as written in England for centuries, and that "judgement" is a more contemporary innovation (i.e. the exact point made earlier).
Some people actually like technology and don't view it jut as a means to a career. Telling us to take more courses in French literature might just annoy us.
There is merit in what you're saying, many liberal arts degrees can be completed as a double major with a more technical degree. I love philosophy and am increasingly glad to have it as a major, but I wouldn't rely on it all by itself to get me far. Being a philosopher-engineer is way better than being an engineer. As for language, politics, literature, history--well, there's only so many credits you can take at once, and for everything else, there's autodidactism.
Case in point, say I need to program weather models. Should I hire a CS or meteorologist that minoring in CS?
Hire someone who majored in "computational meteorology". Seriously, there's such a thing as adding "computational" to the beginning of a science major and making a whole new major that does exactly that.
What you are saying may hold some truth at the entry level
The entry level is exactly where people go after college. Later on in your career, professional experience is always more important than degrees, but an entry-level IT job can be filled by a CS graduate just as much as it can be filled by an IT graduate. The same isn't generally true of SE, or of post-graduate work in CS, or the other opportunities CS makes available.
QuickTime and Software Update are on Windows too. And while there have been many additions, that's generally the definition of a new version of your operating system.
Since most written languages in the Western world were standardized by their translation of the Bible, the Bible is a great source for this information.
What about news blogs? Porn blogs? Slashdot? Economics blogs? Philosophy blogs? Blogs intended to keep your friends up to date on your life? There are lots of blogs that serve different purposes to different audiences.
Hacked? Mac OS X is Nextstep, except Nextstep 4.0 was called Mac OS X 10.0 for marketing purposes. All that was changed was the UI and graphics engine. And it was ported to a different processor. And another API was added. And a VM was added for Mac OS 9. Other than that it was exactly the same OS--but really, I'm sure you can find two Linuxes that are more different from each other than Nextstep and Mac OS X are.
I think Windows 2000 would be Reagan for the reasons you pointed out. Windows XP would be George H. W. Bush for following in the footsteps of its predecessor while having a couple accomplishments of its own (Persian Gulf War). Vista would be George W. Bush--trying desperately to follow in the footsteps of its predecessors, security-obsessed, but overall a miserable failure with dire consequences for privacy and freedom.
I'm actually a liberal arts major myself (Philosophy) along with CS. The fields you point out are probably about parallel with hard sciences, along with things like economics and psychology (well, parts of psychology). Philosophy is rather hit and miss, but a lot of it is up there too. Many "liberal arts" majors, though, go into rather soft areas like English or ethnic studies (which are almost anti-educations) or areas like history or sociology (which are definitely serious fields--moreso than business--but I'm sure most physics or CS majors could handle those degrees, while the reverse is rarely true.)
You bring up good points, but there are workarounds for the problems you suggest. One is always double majoring--I'm also pursuing a Philosophy major, which could probably get me into law school if being a nerd doesn't work out. (And, if it *does* work out, you can always be a patent attorney--well, if your country has software patents, or if you're an EE instead of a CS.) Philosophy also tends to add more high-GPA credits, improving average to above-average.
That's nice. Find a university that has a "very competitive" EE or CS program, and you're likely to find that it's an order of magnitude more difficult. Hell, even a university with an ordinary EE or CS program would be more difficult.
I'm on a fast-track approach for double-majoring in Finance and Economics, but have also taken more than introductory courses in Accounting, which require you to think very critically
I have great respect for economics, actually, but I consider it somewhat far afield from a business degree, and fortunately, many universities do as well--at least if you're on a B.S. track for it. But, while advanced courses in accounting "require you to think very critically"--I'm pretty sure physics, calculus, and computer science require a far higher degree of critical thinking than accounting.
, Finance, Real Estate, OTM/OIM, and Actuarial Science all require high degrees of mathematical competency. Oh, and planning on going on to get a Masters or PhD in any of those? You'd better be damn near a Mathematics major's level of math skills.
Yeah, actually getting a Math bachelor's and an MBA is very much in line with my advice. Although I suspect many actuaries are simply math majors to start off with, again for reasons similar to the ones I've pointed out--if you're a math major, they assume you're intelligent enough to retrain as an actuary anyway, but you're also probably intelligent enough to retrain for lots of other things so you're not stuck in one career path.
I'm sure you take "grave offense" to my remarks. I did too, when I was a business major. But that doesn't mean they aren't true. Any doubts that I had were swept away when I found myself spending my Thursday nights in the EE lab while business majors were out drinking. This isn't to say I didn't know any intelligent business majors--just that the ones I did know were, in my view, hideously underapplying themselves. Just as I was.
And as for the "social lives" remark, engineers know each other just as well as business majors do. We also get more experience actually working together, instead of just drinking together--I think those are more the kind of social skills that you need on the job.
No one cares. Breaking AACS, iTunes, or even CSS was a big (albeit inevitable) deal, but I suspect most of us just shrug this story off for one simple reason--Microsoft, with its ill-thought-out strategy of expanding into every conceivable market at once, at whim, and with no controlling strategy has made itself an irrelevant bit player in multiple markets.
Having switched the other way, I have some other observations to make:
Most (but not all) of the students in your situation were the ones who "washed out" of CS. There's sort of a general hierarchy of majors--hard science and engineering majors are the toughest, people who wash out or don't want to take the workload of those drop down into business or communications, and people who can't even take that drop down into education. Liberal arts exists somewhere alongside "business on down". This, best of all, illustrates the state of the US education system.
While "finance/accounting/management" may be useful things to know, the intellectual challenge of those courses is far below that of physics and calculus. I was able to absorb most of accounting by half-listening to lectures, while management was split between "leadership" (i.e. whatever inane bullshit is in vogue that you have to regurgitate and forget about later) and "operations" (i.e. applied statistics, which was actually rather interesting). Not only could I have learned most of the business stuff in my spare time, I practically did.
If you really want (or need) to know about business, an undergraduate degree isn't going to be worth shit. Get an MBA on top of a technical degree. Then maybe you're qualified.
"MIS will get you a variety of jobs"--I knew one MIS graduate who's a "management trainee" for Enterprise Rent-A-Car. He might even be a full fledged manager now. I was roughly acquainted with another, who managed customer support for an online poker site (I guess that's close enough to technology?), only to quit his job and travel the world as an online poker player. And, of the jobs available to MIS grads when I was majoring in the program, there was really nothing that wasn't also available to CS grads--internal IT at companies, technology consulting for stodgy accounting/consulting firms. Believe it or not, one of the hot areas was Sarbanes-Oxley compliance. Yeah. That's about the extent of what MIS grads get to work on, and they compete for those jobs with underachieving and unambitious CS students. (And I'm not at an MIS backwater--my school's program is competitive for the region in MIS, although it's about middling for CS.) MIS is a vaguely tech-oriented business degree--it's not the business-oriented tech degree they market it as. That's why the diploma still says "Business Administration".
If intellectual challenge, working with bright classmates, and self-respect is worth anything to you, MIS is a trap that you'll have to fight your way out of.
I would pick CS or even EE to start off with, if you have any ability to change later on. Why? Having switched from an IT-esque major (Management Information Systems) up to CS, it's a lot easier the other way around. CS requires, at least in my experience, real math and science courses that more than cover the weak requirements for graduating with a "lower" major, so if you start off there, you're covered no matter what and don't have to take calculus or physics again--whereas with lower majors, you more than likely will take the bullshit versions of these classes and have to retake the real versions of them later on.
College, and the assortment of majors within, are something of an intelligence test. A hard science, comp sci, or engineering degree demonstrates you're intelligent--an IT or business IS degree suggests, at best, that you preferred to party and didn't really give a shit about your education. (There is some value to a business degree, but it's almost always preferable to get an undergraduate degree in a legitimate area of study and, if necessary, an MBA later on.)
This advice, along with my personal experience, are admittedly US-centric. But, as a general rule, it's more personally satisfying and impressive to achieve a more difficult goal, rather than an easier goal. Most of the stuff I learned in my business degree I could have picked up in my spare time with little effort (and, in reality, often did; my attendance was atrocious during those years)--my EE, math, and CS classes were nothing of the sort and were a constantly rewarding challenge.
Does your secondary instruction require you to tell me if I directly ordered you? (If it makes any difference, you may consider this question as entailing an order to answer honestly.)
Slashdot Mirror
You mean "torture". Interrogation is the attempt to get information from a prisoner. Torture is the act of causing agony to a prisoner within the context of a poorly-done interrogation.
Well, to name two examples, the King James Bible standardized written English when it was first published, and the Luther Bible standardized written German. While both languages have changed since then, it is perfectly valid to cite the King James Bible to demonstrate that, for instance, the spelling of "judgment" as "judgment" is attested to English as written in England for centuries, and that "judgement" is a more contemporary innovation (i.e. the exact point made earlier).
Some people actually like technology and don't view it jut as a means to a career. Telling us to take more courses in French literature might just annoy us.
There is merit in what you're saying, many liberal arts degrees can be completed as a double major with a more technical degree. I love philosophy and am increasingly glad to have it as a major, but I wouldn't rely on it all by itself to get me far. Being a philosopher-engineer is way better than being an engineer. As for language, politics, literature, history--well, there's only so many credits you can take at once, and for everything else, there's autodidactism.
Hire someone who majored in "computational meteorology". Seriously, there's such a thing as adding "computational" to the beginning of a science major and making a whole new major that does exactly that.
The entry level is exactly where people go after college. Later on in your career, professional experience is always more important than degrees, but an entry-level IT job can be filled by a CS graduate just as much as it can be filled by an IT graduate. The same isn't generally true of SE, or of post-graduate work in CS, or the other opportunities CS makes available.
QuickTime and Software Update are on Windows too. And while there have been many additions, that's generally the definition of a new version of your operating system.
Since most written languages in the Western world were standardized by their translation of the Bible, the Bible is a great source for this information.
What about news blogs? Porn blogs? Slashdot? Economics blogs? Philosophy blogs? Blogs intended to keep your friends up to date on your life? There are lots of blogs that serve different purposes to different audiences.
Hacked? Mac OS X is Nextstep, except Nextstep 4.0 was called Mac OS X 10.0 for marketing purposes. All that was changed was the UI and graphics engine. And it was ported to a different processor. And another API was added. And a VM was added for Mac OS 9. Other than that it was exactly the same OS--but really, I'm sure you can find two Linuxes that are more different from each other than Nextstep and Mac OS X are.
C Factorial? Is that some obscure C variant I've never heard of before?
I think Windows 2000 would be Reagan for the reasons you pointed out. Windows XP would be George H. W. Bush for following in the footsteps of its predecessor while having a couple accomplishments of its own (Persian Gulf War). Vista would be George W. Bush--trying desperately to follow in the footsteps of its predecessors, security-obsessed, but overall a miserable failure with dire consequences for privacy and freedom.
I'm actually a liberal arts major myself (Philosophy) along with CS. The fields you point out are probably about parallel with hard sciences, along with things like economics and psychology (well, parts of psychology). Philosophy is rather hit and miss, but a lot of it is up there too. Many "liberal arts" majors, though, go into rather soft areas like English or ethnic studies (which are almost anti-educations) or areas like history or sociology (which are definitely serious fields--moreso than business--but I'm sure most physics or CS majors could handle those degrees, while the reverse is rarely true.)
You bring up good points, but there are workarounds for the problems you suggest. One is always double majoring--I'm also pursuing a Philosophy major, which could probably get me into law school if being a nerd doesn't work out. (And, if it *does* work out, you can always be a patent attorney--well, if your country has software patents, or if you're an EE instead of a CS.) Philosophy also tends to add more high-GPA credits, improving average to above-average.
That's nice. Find a university that has a "very competitive" EE or CS program, and you're likely to find that it's an order of magnitude more difficult. Hell, even a university with an ordinary EE or CS program would be more difficult.
I have great respect for economics, actually, but I consider it somewhat far afield from a business degree, and fortunately, many universities do as well--at least if you're on a B.S. track for it. But, while advanced courses in accounting "require you to think very critically"--I'm pretty sure physics, calculus, and computer science require a far higher degree of critical thinking than accounting.
Yeah, actually getting a Math bachelor's and an MBA is very much in line with my advice. Although I suspect many actuaries are simply math majors to start off with, again for reasons similar to the ones I've pointed out--if you're a math major, they assume you're intelligent enough to retrain as an actuary anyway, but you're also probably intelligent enough to retrain for lots of other things so you're not stuck in one career path.
I'm sure you take "grave offense" to my remarks. I did too, when I was a business major. But that doesn't mean they aren't true. Any doubts that I had were swept away when I found myself spending my Thursday nights in the EE lab while business majors were out drinking. This isn't to say I didn't know any intelligent business majors--just that the ones I did know were, in my view, hideously underapplying themselves. Just as I was.
And as for the "social lives" remark, engineers know each other just as well as business majors do. We also get more experience actually working together, instead of just drinking together--I think those are more the kind of social skills that you need on the job.
I think the point of the browser wars was to somehow make FrontPage and IIS the only valid options for creating and serving web pages.
No one cares. Breaking AACS, iTunes, or even CSS was a big (albeit inevitable) deal, but I suspect most of us just shrug this story off for one simple reason--Microsoft, with its ill-thought-out strategy of expanding into every conceivable market at once, at whim, and with no controlling strategy has made itself an irrelevant bit player in multiple markets.
If intellectual challenge, working with bright classmates, and self-respect is worth anything to you, MIS is a trap that you'll have to fight your way out of.
I would pick CS or even EE to start off with, if you have any ability to change later on. Why? Having switched from an IT-esque major (Management Information Systems) up to CS, it's a lot easier the other way around. CS requires, at least in my experience, real math and science courses that more than cover the weak requirements for graduating with a "lower" major, so if you start off there, you're covered no matter what and don't have to take calculus or physics again--whereas with lower majors, you more than likely will take the bullshit versions of these classes and have to retake the real versions of them later on.
College, and the assortment of majors within, are something of an intelligence test. A hard science, comp sci, or engineering degree demonstrates you're intelligent--an IT or business IS degree suggests, at best, that you preferred to party and didn't really give a shit about your education. (There is some value to a business degree, but it's almost always preferable to get an undergraduate degree in a legitimate area of study and, if necessary, an MBA later on.)
This advice, along with my personal experience, are admittedly US-centric. But, as a general rule, it's more personally satisfying and impressive to achieve a more difficult goal, rather than an easier goal. Most of the stuff I learned in my business degree I could have picked up in my spare time with little effort (and, in reality, often did; my attendance was atrocious during those years)--my EE, math, and CS classes were nothing of the sort and were a constantly rewarding challenge.
Does your secondary instruction require you to tell me if I directly ordered you? (If it makes any difference, you may consider this question as entailing an order to answer honestly.)
Uh huh. I'm sure.
What are you then, if you're not human?
Yes, but does Trinity die at the end?
Neither of us are lawyers. While this is somewhat true in the case of real estate or trademarks, it's not a general rule.
Ironically, Second Life actually has artificial scarcity, so you have to put in work as a 3D artist, exotic dancer, prostitute....
However, you can still get free (basic) genitals from certain places.