You touched on one of my main points: Engineering is, IMO, as much a mindset as a set of knowledge skills. A good Engineer is wasted as a line programmer. IMO, the world would be a much better place if we had more competent Engineers who also took a Dale Carnegie course. Your comment about the Engineer solving a problem with less-than optimal code is exactly why I said Engineers should know how to program. Writing programs should be a part of their problem-solving skill set, but not the main focus of their occupation.
Your description of the problems regarding communicating with the B-school types describes a different problem entirely. A common problem of the B-school types seems to be ego-driven, hip-shooting gunslinging, with a tendency to shoot first and aim later. There have been a number of books out over the last 4 years describing the problem of "jumping to solutions" among managers. IMO, problem solving skills should not be limited to Engineers and programmers, they should be taught to everyone who claims a college education.
Well, first, Engineers shouldn't become programmers. They should know how to program, but otherwise it's a mismatch of talent.
Second, programmers who are still just crafting code after 45 years in the field should go somewhere and get a shot of ambition. Programming is a good place for younger folks to keep them out of trouble. Sooner or later the smart ones figure out that programming is more about creating solutions to problems rather than writing code. Figure out a solution and then pass it off the the young guys to do the drudge work. Those that don't figure this out will eventually give up and migrate to management, sales, Art or something more suited to their talents.
Third, problems don't solve themselves, but code can write itself. Writing programs that write programs frees up truly creative minds and you get the benefits of not having to hang around with a bunch of hotshot, know-it-alls who don't listen to their elders.
Hey, I've been programming for 45 years, and I know what I'm talking about...
Yup, this sounds like a clear case of jumping to solutions. The problem is stated as a solution, rather than the difference between the way things are and the way you would like them to be.
On the other hand, getting rich off reckless drivers sounds like a classic case of privatization of law enforcement. Good entrepeneurial thinking.
Which is more important to you?
If you are interested in actually improving driving conditions, try analysing the problem using a reliable problem-solving/troubleshooting approach. I recommend "The Thinker's Toolkit" by Mason Jones http://www.amazon.com/Thinkers-Toolkit-Powerful-Techniques-Problem/dp/0812928083 . If you are interested in making money off the enforcement of public safety, this book may still be a great help.
Sorry, I forgot to include the fact that the network dbms system does not require you to rename or re-link your directory scheme. It simply creates pointers to relevant links and then maintains the pointer logic.
A lot depends on the type of data. If it is truly experimental results, then results could be easily organized in tables, and tables can be logically accessed, arranged and manipulated using standard rules of set theory. Relational databases work this way, but there are other approaches.
The previous suggestions about leaving your data intact and refining the access is good advice. I have used and developed some network dbms systems for this type of data. The current trend seems to be toward Object-Oriented Network dbms systems, but I'm not sure that is the way to go; OONDBMS tends to be static and hard to maintain in a dynamic experimental environment. The largest experimental environment that I've had the opportunity to work on, with an energy company here in Houston, was a statistical analysis of nuclear reactions. The data was constantly changing and we needed a self-referencing, dynamic data repository. This is the type of system where you download data sets and do your analysis AFTER you have acquired it locally. The dbms was written in FORTRAN90 and was very fast, but you need a team for something like this unless you are epert enough to program it all yourself.. It actually used very little code, but the record management and indexes (mostly ISAM/invertedISAM took massive amounts of computer power. There are now some cute tools in FORTRAN 2000 that allow you to use a web browser as a front end, but I don't usually want to look at the data being gathered; I usually want to crunch the statistics and see the results. The browser front-ends I have seen tend to require too much tweaking in order to adapt to the changing data parameters. Remote terminals make more sense. Maybe you should be willing to change the method of accessing the data and not try to maintain dozens of links.
If you can't write programs better than you phrased your question you will be no good to anybody. Learn to think and write clearly.
I suggest you start with a book similar to, "Programming Logic and Design" by Farrell http://www.powells.com/biblio?inkey=17-9781418836337-0 . This approach teaches you how to think about solving problems using computers, and you will not be stuck in any specific language. There are already too many people out there who learned a computer language and jumped to the conclusion they were programmers.
When you do pick a language, pick a GOOD source for learning. I like the books written by Charles Petzold or the books produced by Deitel and Deitel. Pick a useful language like C/C++ if you can.
Make a list of all the things you would like to program if you could, then start with the smaller ones and work forward. Learning to program Excel spreadsheets will teach a a LOT about regular programming, including how to relate to a database. If you are serious about database applications read Joe Celko's books; they will save you LOTS of time and save you from writing too many embarrassing apps.
When you get so you can produce some decent programs, polish up and get some depth by learning Assembly and LISP.
With all this as a foundation, you will have a terrific overview and some solid competency in programming. You can do whatever you want. You will have the mental skills to learn any language and do good work.
You might wonder if you can actually learn programming by reading on your own; the answer is NO! You must program to attain the skill. I have a friend who used to be an electronic organ repairman. He saw that the future was not in his knowledge of electronics, but in swapping out cards in the organs. He took a job on an oil rig for six months and learned to program from Petzold's book on Windows Programming during his off time. Three years later he was earning over $200/hr as a contract programmer. Much of his success has to do with the high standards he sets for himself.
Since it won't happen overnight, you might want to think about short courses offered by DeVry or a similar institution.
Good point, but slightly off: I never argued copyright. But since you ask...
If I offer the fruit of my labor to someone, we agree on prices and conditions. The contract or agreement between us is the main issue. If I offer my services to an employer and he then sells the fruits of my efforts to someone else, he profits and I've gotten paid. If I offer my services and agree not to get paid except for a portion of the profits, that part of the agreement holds until the expiration date of our agreement. What happens after that should be spelled out in the agreement (such as rights reverting back to me or passing on to the employer, etc.). The copyright laws are designed to lessen the burden of negotiating an agreement on every effort by spelling out a common framework for certain classes of effort. This has been applied badly in some cases, but it does protect the right of the producer to dispose of the fruits of his efforts in a way he sees fit. (I liked it better when a person had to apply for copyright protection.)
Assuming this right is innate, and assuming "In order to protect these rights, Government is instituted among men..", then the copyright laws fill a genuine, legitimate purpose. It protects my right to dispose of the fruits of my labor in anyway I see fit, and it protects my right to do whatever I want with myself, including enter into contract, as long as I don't impinge on someone else's right to do the same.
Copyright is different from patents. Although the same logic should apply, the conditions between what has been created and what has been revealed is muddied and mis-applied. The mechanism for protecting invention is broken.
The elements of a contract do not expire just because I die; they become part of my "property" and as such should be passed on to my heirs and beneficiaries.
I'm sorry you misunderstood, but my position is that copyright infringements DO interfere with my right to the benefits of my contracts, and therefore should be protected by law and equity. The ownership of a copyright is, in fact, property. This makes your question, "..which do you favor, liberty or copyright?" a straw man, as they are not mutually exclusive. Copyright infringement is analogous to trespassing on my property and mining for my gold.
I'm struck by the idea that the USA was founded on the supposition that we were born with "property rights." One explanation of this is that "Life" assumes we own ourselves, "Liberty" assumes we can use what we own (ourselves) to do what we want AS LONG AS WE DON'T IMPINGE ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS TO DO THE SAME, and "Pursuit of happiness" is construed as the right to own (and dispose of) the products of our life AS LONG AS WE DON'T IMPINGE ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS TO DO THE SAME.
Producing information (the products of a person's creativity or labor) is different from revealing information. The products of a person's labor should be rewarded as they see fit, while the revealing of information (scientific fact, algorithm, etc..) should be free.
OK, there are Gray areas, but there is not a Gray area in this respect: The OP created the images. He should be rewarded as he sees fit even if he chooses no reward. Rights not enforced are equivalent to no rights at all. He can whine, or he can get them enforced.
FORTH has been mentioned a couple of times, and there are some advantages to having a language like FORTH around. It's small and efficient, and it's possible to prove your logic mathematically. This makes it nice for embedded systems and instrumentation. It is a great tool for writing drivers. And one of the early pioneers (Jeff Fox, I believe) claimed that he could write a FORTH app in about 1% of the code necessary for C. (Big claim: No one has ever challenged it AFAIK, and I can't find the link.) I took my old Win98 system and use it exclusively for playing with colorFORTH. Most of my apps run unbelievably fast on this old Pentium4 system.
On the other hand, not everyone will be able to program in FORTH, especially the school-corrupted students and graduates that Rice was talking about. The philosophy is completely different from C++/JAVA, and it requires some critical thinking to code properly and efficiently. I don't really see it as a time-saver, but I think it might produce a better product in most cases.
I strongly suggest LISP for teaching some high-power programming technique. It is adaptable, fast, efficient, fully-contained, and downright fun to work with. The best programmers I have ever met had LISP in their backgrounds.
Unfortunately you might have to read them all in order to get a complete picture. On the positive side, they are all easily read books. Look up books from Ken Orr and Associates; some of the best books were written by others in his company. It may look like the subject matter is systems and program design plus requirements definitions, but it is ALL database driven and data-oriented.
I am not arguing the numbers; I'm saying the argumentation was LAME! This whole subject requires more research and data than one little, incomplete chart. You might want to start with TSAOUS http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/births_deaths_marriages_divorces.html and look at the various categories from 106-124. Any almanac has better statistics than what you have shown. We do not have to be experts in order to see that you have a bone to pick and that your argument does not hold water.
No statistics are better than corrupted statistics.
That graph you linked to is obviously designed to skew opinion without scientific fact. The data have been cherry-picked: Wheres Mexico? Brazil? Afghanistan? Pakistan? Iraq? Georgia? Somalia?
Statistics that arent complete are useless. Also, consider that this chart doesnt compare gun deaths as a subset of all deaths by violence. Your post does not reflect any counter-arguments reflecting the possible number of lives saved by firearms. BAD argumentation! Shame! Shame!
On the other hand, it is unlikely and unreasonable to think a 12-year old girl should carry a gun. I strongly suggest any women over the age of 10 take the Model Mugging Course. http://modelmugging.org/
One advantage of being an old fart is that sometimes you can remember the way things were...back in the 70's. For some reason, during the last 2 weeks I've had the coincidental task of explaining what we used to call "Data Structured Systems Development", specifically for people who were concerned about data overload.
Ken Orr and Jean Dominique Warnier used to say, "Data that is not used is not accurate." DSDD started from the outputs and systems were designed to capture and use only data that were necessary for those outputs.
Research on information has pretty much debunked the idea that data and information are the same. Even back in the 70's, we had programmers who wanted to capture everything, "..because we might need it some day." The good news is that capturing tons of data allowed us to use statistics to streamline business behavior and do scientific and systems research on the behavior of the businesses. The bad news is that this isn't done very often, and data deteriorates; it never gets to make the transition from bits to information.
Back in the 70's and early 80's we learned a methodology called, "Data Structured Systems Design" and the fundamental presupposition was that everything could be expressed logically and accurately by describing it as relationships in set theory. I have not seen anything since that surpasses the quality and maintainability of database applications and systems.
Someone already mentioned Joe Celko's book "SQL for Smarties" and I would recommend you first read his, "Thinking in Sets" before any of his other books.
I would also suggest some earlier books by Ken Orr and Jean Dominique Warnier. If you learn the Warnier-Orr approach to DESIGNING the system before doing any coding, you will reduce the time necessary for maintaining the system. I have seen hundreds of small IT shops like yours, and much of the time Systems Analysis and Design is neglected and performed "off-the-cuff" by programmers who can't wait to get to the coding. I didn't originally believe Ken Orr's assertion that spending twice as much time designing the system would result in a sharp time reduction for overall project completion, but through experience and observation I became a believer.
Jeez...doesn't anybody know any basic Economics? I mean, some places, like China, have an absolute competitive advantage in manufacturing, and that's where certain things will be manufactured because of it. The off shoring mostly a "comparative advantage" and it is still better to have things produced where this comparative advantage exists. What Andy Grove is talking about is a tariff...the worst idea of all (except for, maybe, subsidies). As much as I admire Andy Grove, this is a BAD idea.
TOA was a little misleading. I originally had the impression that the guy got 37 months for receiving kiddie porn, and that the issue was whether he was likely to look at kiddie porn again. Uh-oh!... We'd better lock up those picture lookers for LIFE! (Wouldn't it be cheaper to just blind them?)
Actually, the issue is: Once the Government has a dangerous (and dangerous is pretty well-defined) criminal incarcerated, and they know that he/she is not rehabilitated or mentally stable, is the Government entitled to protect society by keeping him locked up until either a State or institution takes custody and care? Yeah, there are some issues about incarcerating someone for something he might do in the future, but the general public is too ignorant to evaluate that properly. So, the solution is to preserve the status quo until you can shift the responsibility/blame onto someone else. After all, the perp is already locked up; what difference does a few more years make?
Considering that a huge number of ex-cons are recidivists, it might be used as an argument to keep everybody locked up forever. I noticed that in the case quoted, it was the State that certified him as "dangerous". Given the demagoguery and hysteria of some of our Texas prosecutors, I'm not sure I trust them to define "dangerous" in any meaningful way.
...but there are people who know how to actually work the knowledge contained in newsgroups, and these people will be be severely obstructed.
I subscribe to a number of newsgroups covering many technical subjects I'm very interested in. Using just the Microsoft newsgroups as an example, I have scripts that allow me to input keywords and conceptual ideas, search all the newsgroups simultaneously, and then present the relevant posts and threads prioritized by content. This cuts my browsing for relevant info by about 90%. (This saved me weeks of time on Siverlight and Expression alone!) Even the web-based MS Groups search system is faster than any tools I've seen in the forums.
My alternative seems to be to visit each individual forum separately, even if I do a forum search from the MS websites. Crap! what a time-waster. I expect I'll have to spend a lot of time browsing rather than getting relevant results. Until companies start implementing more OWL and semantic web enhancements, forums seem to be largely deficient compared to newsgroups.
BTW, I use a Bayesian filter for spam filtering, a Bayesian search function for first-level search, and a Neural Net for second-level relevancy. I almost NEVER have to contend with spam. (I wrote my own NN, but I got the idea from Logic Line by Thunderstone. http://www.thunderstone.com/texis/site/pages/ )
You missed the point where I said "there are equilibrium points..." OF COURSE businesses try to reduce labor costs, and every other cost as well. Productivity-per-dollar-invested is a measure of how profitable a business becomes. However, the principle still applies: Even if a company could be run by three or four people and a bunch of robots, that's three or four jobs for qualified people. No good businessman ignores the requirement for NECESSARY employees; they just try to get the best ones that they can (those who produce more).
Sorry, but real world economics DOES bear this out, and has for centuries. Your non sequitur re: "BAIL OUT" is an entirely different issue: Bail outs are neither necessary nor sufficient to sabotage the economy (although they are bad economics); Bail outs are not predictable, therefore cannot be part of any given business strategy; and your example of business trying to find the most profitable equilibrium between costs and profits is exactly why taxing a good or service reduces its availability. (The cost to the consumer is higher, and the producer has no control over reducing the cost once the equilibrium is reached, therefore the market for the good is reduced at the purchase price and the producer produces only what can be sold.)
Nope, you pay them ALL! Assuming you spend your whole paycheck, the prices you pay reflect the amount the goods/services provider had to raise prices to cover the extra costs of payroll taxes plus the extra costs of withholding and paying those taxes.
..."What you tax, you get less of." According to legend, The Zhou Emperor (China, about 1100 B.C.E) laid a heavy tax on salt. Enterprising traders found they could dissolve 20 times the volume of salt in fermented soy. Since there was no tax on liquids, people became more accustomed to salting and preserving their foods in soy. Should the peasants have been "patriotic" and insisted on paying higher prices for the salt?
Lay a tax on items and services, and you will get less of those items and services; lay a tax on businesses and you will get less of those businesses. Yup, they will move to friendlier shores. (For those of you thinking about this, what are the implications for Health Care? Arithmetically, price controls are form of taxation, and the new Health Care Reform imposes both controls and taxes.)
At the present time, Americans in the USA have very favorable prices for petroleum products compared to the rest of the world. What would the cost of gasoline be in the USA if we had to pay taxes on all the oil revenues including the taxes on where the oil is produced? (My estimate is around 9.44 per gallon, YMMV.) Then consider the implications for the Chemical Industry and consumer products.
You want jobs? Jobs are provided by profitable businesses. The more profitable businesses there are, the more jobs available. The more jobs available, the more competition for qualified employees. The more competition for qualified employees, the better the wages, conditions and benefits. There are equilibrium points with in the system, but when non-productivity costs (like taxes) get too burdensome, it makes it profitable for business to put up with the hassles and expense of moving to those friendlier shores.
There is a great children's book, "The Chinese word for Horse and other stories" by John Lewis ( http://www.librarything.com/work/1564984 )which shows the structure of some (very few) Chinese characters. (Charles E. Tuttle co. published a small paperback that illustrated some basic Kanji in the same way, but I can't find my copy and I can't remember the name.) Look for a Chinese calligraphy guide that describes the meaning of the radicals as derived from pictures and you will be well on your way to binding the character with the meaning.
It can take as much as 15 years for something to go from short-term memory to long-term memory. (See "Brain Rules" by John Medina http://brainrules.net/ ) A program that helps bridge the gap between initial learning and structured recall is SuperMemo http://www.supermemo.com/ . Ignore the cruddy website and look at the idea behind it and the history.
Flashcards are good, too.
Major practice for writing Chinese is provided in "copy sheets" which can be found at Chinese shops that sell calligraphy supplies and school supplies. They have blocks with faint outlines of Chinese characters and you practice your calligraphy by tracing the character with your brush tip.
You might find "A practical English-Chinese Pronouncing Dictionary" by Janey Chen http://www.amazon.com/Practical-English-Chinese-Pronouncing-Dictionary-Language/dp/0804818770 . This book give an International Phonetics pronunciation (both Mandarin and Cantonese) next to the Chinese words. This is VERY important: One slight change in sound utterance and you've said something different from what you intended!
My ex-girlfriend and I used to watch a lot of Chinese movies together with the captioning on. The right channel would be Cantonese and the left channel would be Mandarin and the characters would change color as the actors pronounced them. You can find a switch to change the audio channel in most Chinese video stores. This is a good way to associate the sound visually with the language. Cartoons are great for kids and beginning adults because the language is syntactically correct but not too complicated. (Watch out though!; Jackie Chan has lousy Mandarin pronunciation and Zhang Ziyi has lousy Cantonese pronunciation.)
Side note: Japanese Kanji are derived from Chinese characters, b
All you need to know is that the bill is an attempt at price controls, and price controls invariably lead to shortages of the controlled goods and quality reductions in the controlled services. This allows you to skip the BS arguments over extraneous details and avoid wasting energy over emotional rhetoric.
This sounds like another case of "jumping to solutions" and not identifying the actual problem. (You would think lecturers who were actually concerned about this problem would know better.)
What problem are they trying to solve? Is the use of a laptop necessary and sufficient to cause a student's wandering attention? Are pencils and paper better for some reason? (And, Hey!, there may be a neurological support for that reason.) Pencil and paper notes take a different type of organizing skill; does it make sense to dump students into a situation where they are required to learn a new skill along with the content? Is the lecture format the optimum way to be teaching?
Slashdot Mirror
You touched on one of my main points: Engineering is, IMO, as much a mindset as a set of knowledge skills. A good Engineer is wasted as a line programmer. IMO, the world would be a much better place if we had more competent Engineers who also took a Dale Carnegie course. Your comment about the Engineer solving a problem with less-than optimal code is exactly why I said Engineers should know how to program. Writing programs should be a part of their problem-solving skill set, but not the main focus of their occupation.
Your description of the problems regarding communicating with the B-school types describes a different problem entirely. A common problem of the B-school types seems to be ego-driven, hip-shooting gunslinging, with a tendency to shoot first and aim later. There have been a number of books out over the last 4 years describing the problem of "jumping to solutions" among managers. IMO, problem solving skills should not be limited to Engineers and programmers, they should be taught to everyone who claims a college education.
Well, first, Engineers shouldn't become programmers. They should know how to program, but otherwise it's a mismatch of talent.
Second, programmers who are still just crafting code after 45 years in the field should go somewhere and get a shot of ambition. Programming is a good place for younger folks to keep them out of trouble. Sooner or later the smart ones figure out that programming is more about creating solutions to problems rather than writing code. Figure out a solution and then pass it off the the young guys to do the drudge work. Those that don't figure this out will eventually give up and migrate to management, sales, Art or something more suited to their talents.
Third, problems don't solve themselves, but code can write itself. Writing programs that write programs frees up truly creative minds and you get the benefits of not having to hang around with a bunch of hotshot, know-it-alls who don't listen to their elders.
Hey, I've been programming for 45 years, and I know what I'm talking about...
It seems to me that if we could sue the incompetent clods at the Patent Office they would be more conscientious.
Yup, this sounds like a clear case of jumping to solutions. The problem is stated as a solution, rather than the difference between the way things are and the way you would like them to be.
On the other hand, getting rich off reckless drivers sounds like a classic case of privatization of law enforcement. Good entrepeneurial thinking.
Which is more important to you?
If you are interested in actually improving driving conditions, try analysing the problem using a reliable problem-solving/troubleshooting approach. I recommend "The Thinker's Toolkit" by Mason Jones http://www.amazon.com/Thinkers-Toolkit-Powerful-Techniques-Problem/dp/0812928083 . If you are interested in making money off the enforcement of public safety, this book may still be a great help.
Sorry, I forgot to include the fact that the network dbms system does not require you to rename or re-link your directory scheme. It simply creates pointers to relevant links and then maintains the pointer logic.
A lot depends on the type of data. If it is truly experimental results, then results could be easily organized in tables, and tables can be logically accessed, arranged and manipulated using standard rules of set theory. Relational databases work this way, but there are other approaches.
If your data is derived or crunched, You may have a massive logic problem. See this: http://dbmsmusings.blogspot.com/2010/04/problems-with-cap-and-yahoos-little.html , and take heed.
The previous suggestions about leaving your data intact and refining the access is good advice. I have used and developed some network dbms systems for this type of data. The current trend seems to be toward Object-Oriented Network dbms systems, but I'm not sure that is the way to go; OONDBMS tends to be static and hard to maintain in a dynamic experimental environment. The largest experimental environment that I've had the opportunity to work on, with an energy company here in Houston, was a statistical analysis of nuclear reactions. The data was constantly changing and we needed a self-referencing, dynamic data repository. This is the type of system where you download data sets and do your analysis AFTER you have acquired it locally. The dbms was written in FORTRAN90 and was very fast, but you need a team for something like this unless you are epert enough to program it all yourself.. It actually used very little code, but the record management and indexes (mostly ISAM/invertedISAM took massive amounts of computer power. There are now some cute tools in FORTRAN 2000 that allow you to use a web browser as a front end, but I don't usually want to look at the data being gathered; I usually want to crunch the statistics and see the results. The browser front-ends I have seen tend to require too much tweaking in order to adapt to the changing data parameters. Remote terminals make more sense. Maybe you should be willing to change the method of accessing the data and not try to maintain dozens of links.
If you can't write programs better than you phrased your question you will be no good to anybody. Learn to think and write clearly.
I suggest you start with a book similar to, "Programming Logic and Design" by Farrell http://www.powells.com/biblio?inkey=17-9781418836337-0 . This approach teaches you how to think about solving problems using computers, and you will not be stuck in any specific language. There are already too many people out there who learned a computer language and jumped to the conclusion they were programmers.
When you do pick a language, pick a GOOD source for learning. I like the books written by Charles Petzold or the books produced by Deitel and Deitel. Pick a useful language like C/C++ if you can.
Make a list of all the things you would like to program if you could, then start with the smaller ones and work forward. Learning to program Excel spreadsheets will teach a a LOT about regular programming, including how to relate to a database. If you are serious about database applications read Joe Celko's books; they will save you LOTS of time and save you from writing too many embarrassing apps.
When you get so you can produce some decent programs, polish up and get some depth by learning Assembly and LISP.
With all this as a foundation, you will have a terrific overview and some solid competency in programming. You can do whatever you want. You will have the mental skills to learn any language and do good work.
You might wonder if you can actually learn programming by reading on your own; the answer is NO! You must program to attain the skill. I have a friend who used to be an electronic organ repairman. He saw that the future was not in his knowledge of electronics, but in swapping out cards in the organs. He took a job on an oil rig for six months and learned to program from Petzold's book on Windows Programming during his off time. Three years later he was earning over $200/hr as a contract programmer. Much of his success has to do with the high standards he sets for himself.
Since it won't happen overnight, you might want to think about short courses offered by DeVry or a similar institution.
Good Luck, and have fun.
Good point, but slightly off: I never argued copyright. But since you ask...
If I offer the fruit of my labor to someone, we agree on prices and conditions. The contract or agreement between us is the main issue. If I offer my services to an employer and he then sells the fruits of my efforts to someone else, he profits and I've gotten paid. If I offer my services and agree not to get paid except for a portion of the profits, that part of the agreement holds until the expiration date of our agreement. What happens after that should be spelled out in the agreement (such as rights reverting back to me or passing on to the employer, etc.). The copyright laws are designed to lessen the burden of negotiating an agreement on every effort by spelling out a common framework for certain classes of effort. This has been applied badly in some cases, but it does protect the right of the producer to dispose of the fruits of his efforts in a way he sees fit. (I liked it better when a person had to apply for copyright protection.)
Assuming this right is innate, and assuming "In order to protect these rights, Government is instituted among men..", then the copyright laws fill a genuine, legitimate purpose. It protects my right to dispose of the fruits of my labor in anyway I see fit, and it protects my right to do whatever I want with myself, including enter into contract, as long as I don't impinge on someone else's right to do the same.
Copyright is different from patents. Although the same logic should apply, the conditions between what has been created and what has been revealed is muddied and mis-applied. The mechanism for protecting invention is broken.
The elements of a contract do not expire just because I die; they become part of my "property" and as such should be passed on to my heirs and beneficiaries.
I'm sorry you misunderstood, but my position is that copyright infringements DO interfere with my right to the benefits of my contracts, and therefore should be protected by law and equity. The ownership of a copyright is, in fact, property. This makes your question, "..which do you favor, liberty or copyright?" a straw man, as they are not mutually exclusive. Copyright infringement is analogous to trespassing on my property and mining for my gold.
I'm struck by the idea that the USA was founded on the supposition that we were born with "property rights." One explanation of this is that "Life" assumes we own ourselves, "Liberty" assumes we can use what we own (ourselves) to do what we want AS LONG AS WE DON'T IMPINGE ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS TO DO THE SAME, and "Pursuit of happiness" is construed as the right to own (and dispose of) the products of our life AS LONG AS WE DON'T IMPINGE ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS TO DO THE SAME.
Producing information (the products of a person's creativity or labor) is different from revealing information. The products of a person's labor should be rewarded as they see fit, while the revealing of information (scientific fact, algorithm, etc..) should be free.
OK, there are Gray areas, but there is not a Gray area in this respect: The OP created the images. He should be rewarded as he sees fit even if he chooses no reward. Rights not enforced are equivalent to no rights at all. He can whine, or he can get them enforced.
FORTH has been mentioned a couple of times, and there are some advantages to having a language like FORTH around. It's small and efficient, and it's possible to prove your logic mathematically. This makes it nice for embedded systems and instrumentation. It is a great tool for writing drivers. And one of the early pioneers (Jeff Fox, I believe) claimed that he could write a FORTH app in about 1% of the code necessary for C. (Big claim: No one has ever challenged it AFAIK, and I can't find the link.) I took my old Win98 system and use it exclusively for playing with colorFORTH. Most of my apps run unbelievably fast on this old Pentium4 system.
On the other hand, not everyone will be able to program in FORTH, especially the school-corrupted students and graduates that Rice was talking about. The philosophy is completely different from C++/JAVA, and it requires some critical thinking to code properly and efficiently. I don't really see it as a time-saver, but I think it might produce a better product in most cases.
I strongly suggest LISP for teaching some high-power programming technique. It is adaptable, fast, efficient, fully-contained, and downright fun to work with. The best programmers I have ever met had LISP in their backgrounds.
Unfortunately you might have to read them all in order to get a complete picture. On the positive side, they are all easily read books. Look up books from Ken Orr and Associates; some of the best books were written by others in his company. It may look like the subject matter is systems and program design plus requirements definitions, but it is ALL database driven and data-oriented.
I am not arguing the numbers; I'm saying the argumentation was LAME! This whole subject requires more research and data than one little, incomplete chart. You might want to start with TSAOUS http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/births_deaths_marriages_divorces.html and look at the various categories from 106-124. Any almanac has better statistics than what you have shown. We do not have to be experts in order to see that you have a bone to pick and that your argument does not hold water.
No statistics are better than corrupted statistics.
That graph you linked to is obviously designed to skew opinion without scientific fact. The data have been cherry-picked: Wheres Mexico? Brazil? Afghanistan? Pakistan? Iraq? Georgia? Somalia?
Statistics that arent complete are useless. Also, consider that this chart doesnt compare gun deaths as a subset of all deaths by violence. Your post does not reflect any counter-arguments reflecting the possible number of lives saved by firearms. BAD argumentation! Shame! Shame!
On the other hand, it is unlikely and unreasonable to think a 12-year old girl should carry a gun. I strongly suggest any women over the age of 10 take the Model Mugging Course. http://modelmugging.org/
One advantage of being an old fart is that sometimes you can remember the way things were...back in the 70's. For some reason, during the last 2 weeks I've had the coincidental task of explaining what we used to call "Data Structured Systems Development", specifically for people who were concerned about data overload.
Ken Orr and Jean Dominique Warnier used to say, "Data that is not used is not accurate." DSDD started from the outputs and systems were designed to capture and use only data that were necessary for those outputs.
Research on information has pretty much debunked the idea that data and information are the same. Even back in the 70's, we had programmers who wanted to capture everything, "..because we might need it some day." The good news is that capturing tons of data allowed us to use statistics to streamline business behavior and do scientific and systems research on the behavior of the businesses. The bad news is that this isn't done very often, and data deteriorates; it never gets to make the transition from bits to information.
...and improve your quality and maintainability?
Back in the 70's and early 80's we learned a methodology called, "Data Structured Systems Design" and the fundamental presupposition was that everything could be expressed logically and accurately by describing it as relationships in set theory. I have not seen anything since that surpasses the quality and maintainability of database applications and systems.
Someone already mentioned Joe Celko's book "SQL for Smarties" and I would recommend you first read his, "Thinking in Sets" before any of his other books.
I would also suggest some earlier books by Ken Orr and Jean Dominique Warnier. If you learn the Warnier-Orr approach to DESIGNING the system before doing any coding, you will reduce the time necessary for maintaining the system. I have seen hundreds of small IT shops like yours, and much of the time Systems Analysis and Design is neglected and performed "off-the-cuff" by programmers who can't wait to get to the coding. I didn't originally believe Ken Orr's assertion that spending twice as much time designing the system would result in a sharp time reduction for overall project completion, but through experience and observation I became a believer.
Jeez...doesn't anybody know any basic Economics? I mean, some places, like China, have an absolute competitive advantage in manufacturing, and that's where certain things will be manufactured because of it. The off shoring mostly a "comparative advantage" and it is still better to have things produced where this comparative advantage exists. What Andy Grove is talking about is a tariff...the worst idea of all (except for, maybe, subsidies). As much as I admire Andy Grove, this is a BAD idea.
TOA was a little misleading. I originally had the impression that the guy got 37 months for receiving kiddie porn, and that the issue was whether he was likely to look at kiddie porn again. Uh-oh!... We'd better lock up those picture lookers for LIFE! (Wouldn't it be cheaper to just blind them?)
Actually, the issue is: Once the Government has a dangerous (and dangerous is pretty well-defined) criminal incarcerated, and they know that he/she is not rehabilitated or mentally stable, is the Government entitled to protect society by keeping him locked up until either a State or institution takes custody and care? Yeah, there are some issues about incarcerating someone for something he might do in the future, but the general public is too ignorant to evaluate that properly. So, the solution is to preserve the status quo until you can shift the responsibility/blame onto someone else. After all, the perp is already locked up; what difference does a few more years make?
Considering that a huge number of ex-cons are recidivists, it might be used as an argument to keep everybody locked up forever. I noticed that in the case quoted, it was the State that certified him as "dangerous". Given the demagoguery and hysteria of some of our Texas prosecutors, I'm not sure I trust them to define "dangerous" in any meaningful way.
...but there are people who know how to actually work the knowledge contained in newsgroups, and these people will be be severely obstructed.
I subscribe to a number of newsgroups covering many technical subjects I'm very interested in. Using just the Microsoft newsgroups as an example, I have scripts that allow me to input keywords and conceptual ideas, search all the newsgroups simultaneously, and then present the relevant posts and threads prioritized by content. This cuts my browsing for relevant info by about 90%. (This saved me weeks of time on Siverlight and Expression alone!) Even the web-based MS Groups search system is faster than any tools I've seen in the forums.
My alternative seems to be to visit each individual forum separately, even if I do a forum search from the MS websites. Crap! what a time-waster. I expect I'll have to spend a lot of time browsing rather than getting relevant results. Until companies start implementing more OWL and semantic web enhancements, forums seem to be largely deficient compared to newsgroups.
BTW, I use a Bayesian filter for spam filtering, a Bayesian search function for first-level search, and a Neural Net for second-level relevancy. I almost NEVER have to contend with spam. (I wrote my own NN, but I got the idea from Logic Line by Thunderstone. http://www.thunderstone.com/texis/site/pages/ )
I hope MS reconsiders.
You missed the point where I said "there are equilibrium points..." OF COURSE businesses try to reduce labor costs, and every other cost as well. Productivity-per-dollar-invested is a measure of how profitable a business becomes. However, the principle still applies: Even if a company could be run by three or four people and a bunch of robots, that's three or four jobs for qualified people. No good businessman ignores the requirement for NECESSARY employees; they just try to get the best ones that they can (those who produce more).
Sorry, but real world economics DOES bear this out, and has for centuries. Your non sequitur re: "BAIL OUT" is an entirely different issue: Bail outs are neither necessary nor sufficient to sabotage the economy (although they are bad economics); Bail outs are not predictable, therefore cannot be part of any given business strategy; and your example of business trying to find the most profitable equilibrium between costs and profits is exactly why taxing a good or service reduces its availability. (The cost to the consumer is higher, and the producer has no control over reducing the cost once the equilibrium is reached, therefore the market for the good is reduced at the purchase price and the producer produces only what can be sold.)
Nope, you pay them ALL! Assuming you spend your whole paycheck, the prices you pay reflect the amount the goods/services provider had to raise prices to cover the extra costs of payroll taxes plus the extra costs of withholding and paying those taxes.
..."What you tax, you get less of." According to legend, The Zhou Emperor (China, about 1100 B.C.E) laid a heavy tax on salt. Enterprising traders found they could dissolve 20 times the volume of salt in fermented soy. Since there was no tax on liquids, people became more accustomed to salting and preserving their foods in soy. Should the peasants have been "patriotic" and insisted on paying higher prices for the salt?
Lay a tax on items and services, and you will get less of those items and services; lay a tax on businesses and you will get less of those businesses. Yup, they will move to friendlier shores. (For those of you thinking about this, what are the implications for Health Care? Arithmetically, price controls are form of taxation, and the new Health Care Reform imposes both controls and taxes.)
At the present time, Americans in the USA have very favorable prices for petroleum products compared to the rest of the world. What would the cost of gasoline be in the USA if we had to pay taxes on all the oil revenues including the taxes on where the oil is produced? (My estimate is around 9.44 per gallon, YMMV.) Then consider the implications for the Chemical Industry and consumer products.
You want jobs? Jobs are provided by profitable businesses. The more profitable businesses there are, the more jobs available. The more jobs available, the more competition for qualified employees. The more competition for qualified employees, the better the wages, conditions and benefits. There are equilibrium points with in the system, but when non-productivity costs (like taxes) get too burdensome, it makes it profitable for business to put up with the hassles and expense of moving to those friendlier shores.
There is a great children's book, "The Chinese word for Horse and other stories" by John Lewis ( http://www.librarything.com/work/1564984 )which shows the structure of some (very few) Chinese characters. (Charles E. Tuttle co. published a small paperback that illustrated some basic Kanji in the same way, but I can't find my copy and I can't remember the name.) Look for a Chinese calligraphy guide that describes the meaning of the radicals as derived from pictures and you will be well on your way to binding the character with the meaning.
It can take as much as 15 years for something to go from short-term memory to long-term memory. (See "Brain Rules" by John Medina http://brainrules.net/ ) A program that helps bridge the gap between initial learning and structured recall is SuperMemo http://www.supermemo.com/ . Ignore the cruddy website and look at the idea behind it and the history.
Flashcards are good, too.
Major practice for writing Chinese is provided in "copy sheets" which can be found at Chinese shops that sell calligraphy supplies and school supplies. They have blocks with faint outlines of Chinese characters and you practice your calligraphy by tracing the character with your brush tip.
You might find "A practical English-Chinese Pronouncing Dictionary" by Janey Chen http://www.amazon.com/Practical-English-Chinese-Pronouncing-Dictionary-Language/dp/0804818770 . This book give an International Phonetics pronunciation (both Mandarin and Cantonese) next to the Chinese words. This is VERY important: One slight change in sound utterance and you've said something different from what you intended!
When learning Chinese, learn some patterns. I suggest "Chiang's Practical Chinese Language Patterns" http://www.amazon.com/Chiangs-Practical-Language-Patterns-Self-Learners/dp/9579727236 , "Practical Chinese Reader" (and the associated workbooks) http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0887271871/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_2?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=9579727236&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=14FXWRGNRW203JQ3QYZC , and an advanced monograph: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED280308&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED280308 .
Another resource, associating the sound with the character by typing it, can be found here: http://vpc-mandarin.blogspot.com/2009/04/how-and-why-to-write-chinese-by-typing.html
My ex-girlfriend and I used to watch a lot of Chinese movies together with the captioning on. The right channel would be Cantonese and the left channel would be Mandarin and the characters would change color as the actors pronounced them. You can find a switch to change the audio channel in most Chinese video stores. This is a good way to associate the sound visually with the language. Cartoons are great for kids and beginning adults because the language is syntactically correct but not too complicated. (Watch out though!; Jackie Chan has lousy Mandarin pronunciation and Zhang Ziyi has lousy Cantonese pronunciation.)
Side note: Japanese Kanji are derived from Chinese characters, b
All you need to know is that the bill is an attempt at price controls, and price controls invariably lead to shortages of the controlled goods and quality reductions in the controlled services. This allows you to skip the BS arguments over extraneous details and avoid wasting energy over emotional rhetoric.
This sounds like another case of "jumping to solutions" and not identifying the actual problem. (You would think lecturers who were actually concerned about this problem would know better.)
What problem are they trying to solve? Is the use of a laptop necessary and sufficient to cause a student's wandering attention? Are pencils and paper better for some reason? (And, Hey!, there may be a neurological support for that reason.) Pencil and paper notes take a different type of organizing skill; does it make sense to dump students into a situation where they are required to learn a new skill along with the content? Is the lecture format the optimum way to be teaching?
I ask the last question because I've taken some programs such as "Money and You" http://www.excellerated.com/index.php/45, "Powerful Presentations" http://www.thepowerfulpresentations.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=47&Itemid=70, and "The Accounting Game" http://www.theaccountinggame.com/ and 25 years later I can still reproduce the whole body of knowledge as if it was yesterday. (These programs were spun off from the Burklyn Business School. One of the best programs in the USA today may be the "Supercamp" program for teens. which teaches valuable study and life skills. http://www.supercamp.com/ ) These are only programs I know about; what else may be available?