This should go without saying, but I hope they tried to select kids with roughly the same taste for marshmallows. When I was a kid, you couldn't have paid me to eat a marshmallow. Even today, I don't particularly care for them. Except in rice krispy treats.
Make no mistake, EVERYONE in civilized society pays the price for religion. The 9/11/2001 hijackers were fundamentalists in their religion.
I can't argue that. Religion has been at the core of MANY conflicts throughout the history of mankind. However, at the risk of demonstrating Godwin's Law, I would also point out that Darwinism was, at least nominally, at the core of the Holocaust. And social Darwinism played a big part in the Cultural Revolution in China and Stalin's purges in the Soviet Union. So it's not as if scientific extremism doesn't exist, either.
yes, funny that, the president that believed this was a "born again christian."
FDR and LBJ were born again Christians? I was referring to the wholesale transfer of wealth from workers to seniors known as Social Security and Medicare (aka vote purchasing).
No not at all. *Any* belief that is not supported by reasonable evidence is absurd.
I believe that chocolate is superior to vanilla but I have absolutely no evidence to support that belief. So I guess it's absurd. Furthermore, who gets to judge what's reasonable? You, again?
*I* didn't, society has adopted this benchmark.
Obviously not, at least not in the United States. The vast majority of Americans are theists. Why would you cling to such an absurd belief in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary?
That we silently accept the absurd beliefs as something other than delusions.
Oh what a terrible burden that must be for you. I'm so sorry that the theists have imposed this horrible punishment on you for nothing more than exhibiting "common sense" (which, if the statistics are to be believed, are far from common).
People hold all sorts of absurd beliefs. A fairly large majority of Americans believe it's a good idea to take a significant portion of workers' compensation and give it the wealthiest generation in the history of the world. *sigh* To each their own.
You're essentially claiming that you (and people like you) are empowered to decide which absurd beliefs are delusional and which ones aren't. How'd you earn that right? Did Gaea, herself, come down and ordain you Decider of Delusions? I hate to think what will happen when your Priesthood of Phantasy starts to decide that each other is delusional...
In any case, I don't envy you that responsibility. If only there were some way you could get out of it... some way you could just live and let live... Maybe some day we'll finally reach a point where people are free to believe what they want to believe and you'll finally be relieved of your duty.
I don't have to be tolerant of the belief in Zeus. I can see flat out, it is bunk.
I'm curious how you can "see" that Zeus is bunk. You may not believe he exists (personally, I don't, either), but that's no proof. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. To claim otherwise is unscientific.
If I say, there is no god and I will not entertain any such nonsense, people are irrational. They will say I am intolerant.
If I say there IS a god and I will not entertain any atheist nonsense, people are irrational. They will say I am intolerant. Your point?
they are expecting special treatment for their own neurosis.
Exactly what special treatment do theists expect? And what neurosis are you speaking of? I think it's pretty callous to call a belief which you do not share "neurosis". You and I may disagree on a lot of things. Does that make both of us neurotic?
The plaintiff's argument against such sales is scary and can be taken very far very quickly: 'If you don't know who's inside the theater, it's very difficult to provide security.'
I don't know how that's scary. Isn't that exactly what the airlines do? If I have a ticket to LA, can I turn around and sell it on Craig's List? Maybe, but I bet there are fees involved and it's not easy to do.
These kids are more right than they think. Because they're in New York, their individual vote is worth approximately nothing. In the 2004 election, 60% of New Yorkers voted for Kerry. With their own senator on the ballot, there's a good chance that number will go up. The votes of a few thousand college kids aren't going to make a bit of difference. New York's votes in the electoral college will go to the Democratic candidate. The iPod is a good deal; the scholarship is a GREAT deal.
I know most of us don't want to believe it, but there are still people who code in FORTRAN. As bad as that is, coding in FORTRAN would be a lot worse without the Caps Lock key. My poor pinkies are cringing at the thought of it...
What you're basically describing is investing on margin (i.e. investing with borrowed money). Most experts steer people away from investing on margin. The possibility exists to lose money that wasn't yours to begin with AS WELL as having to pay interest on that money. And the interest rates are usually high.
You might be thinking that the interest rate on your student loans is really low. But recent legislation changed that. See this article for a description of the recent change. To summarize, the rate on Stafford Loans is going up to 6.8% and PLUS loans are going up to 8.5%. To compare, my mortgage is only 5.375% and my wife's consolidated med school loans are only 2.875%. So the new rates are pretty high.
What I would suggest to you is to find a really high-rate savings account or a money market account. I often see Emigrant Direct mentioned on Ben's Bargains as a good place to park your money. If you want to go down the money market route, I can highly suggest Vanguard'sPrime Money Market Fund. Don't bother with the tax-free money market funds. You don't have enough income to make it worth it.
I would definitely steer clear of investing in stocks. It's just to risky to do with borrowed money. Once you have some money of your own that you can put away for a long time (think retirement savings), that's when you turn to stocks. Also avoid bond funds. Unlike individual bonds, bond funds have no maturity date, so they entail risk with little reward.
Others have suggested that it's illegal to invest your student loans. I find that hard to believe since that would preclude putting your loan money in any form of interest-bearing account. Maybe there's an exception for FDIC-insured accounts?
Speaking as someone who actually awards an annual scholarship, I would NEVER consider awarding it to a student who was only interested in tech stuff (see subject). Why would we want to "encourage growth in the tech sector"? There's too many techies out there as it is. You need to be a well-rounded student if you want to have any hope of getting a scholarship.
Truth be told, at the undergrad level, most CS programs are the same. If you WANT to go to a high-powered school (and, ergo, spend all that money), more power to you. I think going to a high powered school is more important for your graduate degree, but here's a list, anyways: MIT, Stanford, Carnegie Mellon, Berkeley, Cornell, Illinois, Washington, Princeton, Texas... Of course, if you already know what you want to specialize in (which, to me, sounds like you're DEAD SET on software engineering), then you might want to look in to a school that specializes in software. I would be willing to bet, though, that a BS from your state's top public school is just as good as a BS from any of these places.
Bill Woessner --- Bill Woessner National Instruments Quantum linguistics: Until you looked, this message was in Spanish.
I cannot believe I wasted an hour and a half of my life, not to mention something like $7 watching that movie. I would have just left, but I make it a policy not to walk out of a movie I paid for, in hopes that it might actually get better. As far as being scary? Please. It was about as transparent as "Scream". I wish I'd brought a booklight and a good book with me. --- Bill Woessner National Instruments Quantum linguistics: Until you looked, this message was in Spanish.
Slashdot Mirror
This should go without saying, but I hope they tried to select kids with roughly the same taste for marshmallows. When I was a kid, you couldn't have paid me to eat a marshmallow. Even today, I don't particularly care for them. Except in rice krispy treats.
Make no mistake, EVERYONE in civilized society pays the price for religion. The 9/11/2001 hijackers were fundamentalists in their religion.
I can't argue that. Religion has been at the core of MANY conflicts throughout the history of mankind. However, at the risk of demonstrating Godwin's Law, I would also point out that Darwinism was, at least nominally, at the core of the Holocaust. And social Darwinism played a big part in the Cultural Revolution in China and Stalin's purges in the Soviet Union. So it's not as if scientific extremism doesn't exist, either.
yes, funny that, the president that believed this was a "born again christian."
FDR and LBJ were born again Christians? I was referring to the wholesale transfer of wealth from workers to seniors known as Social Security and Medicare (aka vote purchasing).
No not at all. *Any* belief that is not supported by reasonable evidence is absurd.
I believe that chocolate is superior to vanilla but I have absolutely no evidence to support that belief. So I guess it's absurd. Furthermore, who gets to judge what's reasonable? You, again?
*I* didn't, society has adopted this benchmark.
Obviously not, at least not in the United States. The vast majority of Americans are theists. Why would you cling to such an absurd belief in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary?
That we silently accept the absurd beliefs as something other than delusions.
Oh what a terrible burden that must be for you. I'm so sorry that the theists have imposed this horrible punishment on you for nothing more than exhibiting "common sense" (which, if the statistics are to be believed, are far from common).
People hold all sorts of absurd beliefs. A fairly large majority of Americans believe it's a good idea to take a significant portion of workers' compensation and give it the wealthiest generation in the history of the world. *sigh* To each their own.
You're essentially claiming that you (and people like you) are empowered to decide which absurd beliefs are delusional and which ones aren't. How'd you earn that right? Did Gaea, herself, come down and ordain you Decider of Delusions? I hate to think what will happen when your Priesthood of Phantasy starts to decide that each other is delusional...
In any case, I don't envy you that responsibility. If only there were some way you could get out of it... some way you could just live and let live... Maybe some day we'll finally reach a point where people are free to believe what they want to believe and you'll finally be relieved of your duty.
I don't have to be tolerant of the belief in Zeus. I can see flat out, it is bunk.
I'm curious how you can "see" that Zeus is bunk. You may not believe he exists (personally, I don't, either), but that's no proof. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. To claim otherwise is unscientific.
If I say, there is no god and I will not entertain any such nonsense, people are irrational. They will say I am intolerant.
If I say there IS a god and I will not entertain any atheist nonsense, people are irrational. They will say I am intolerant. Your point?
they are expecting special treatment for their own neurosis.
Exactly what special treatment do theists expect? And what neurosis are you speaking of? I think it's pretty callous to call a belief which you do not share "neurosis". You and I may disagree on a lot of things. Does that make both of us neurotic?
The plaintiff's argument against such sales is scary and can be taken very far very quickly: 'If you don't know who's inside the theater, it's very difficult to provide security.'
I don't know how that's scary. Isn't that exactly what the airlines do? If I have a ticket to LA, can I turn around and sell it on Craig's List? Maybe, but I bet there are fees involved and it's not easy to do.
These kids are more right than they think. Because they're in New York, their individual vote is worth approximately nothing. In the 2004 election, 60% of New Yorkers voted for Kerry. With their own senator on the ballot, there's a good chance that number will go up. The votes of a few thousand college kids aren't going to make a bit of difference. New York's votes in the electoral college will go to the Democratic candidate. The iPod is a good deal; the scholarship is a GREAT deal.
I know most of us don't want to believe it, but there are still people who code in FORTRAN. As bad as that is, coding in FORTRAN would be a lot worse without the Caps Lock key. My poor pinkies are cringing at the thought of it...
What you're basically describing is investing on margin (i.e. investing with borrowed money). Most experts steer people away from investing on margin. The possibility exists to lose money that wasn't yours to begin with AS WELL as having to pay interest on that money. And the interest rates are usually high.
You might be thinking that the interest rate on your student loans is really low. But recent legislation changed that. See this article for a description of the recent change. To summarize, the rate on Stafford Loans is going up to 6.8% and PLUS loans are going up to 8.5%. To compare, my mortgage is only 5.375% and my wife's consolidated med school loans are only 2.875%. So the new rates are pretty high.
What I would suggest to you is to find a really high-rate savings account or a money market account. I often see Emigrant Direct mentioned on Ben's Bargains as a good place to park your money. If you want to go down the money market route, I can highly suggest Vanguard's Prime Money Market Fund. Don't bother with the tax-free money market funds. You don't have enough income to make it worth it.
I would definitely steer clear of investing in stocks. It's just to risky to do with borrowed money. Once you have some money of your own that you can put away for a long time (think retirement savings), that's when you turn to stocks. Also avoid bond funds. Unlike individual bonds, bond funds have no maturity date, so they entail risk with little reward.
Others have suggested that it's illegal to invest your student loans. I find that hard to believe since that would preclude putting your loan money in any form of interest-bearing account. Maybe there's an exception for FDIC-insured accounts?
Speaking as someone who actually awards an annual scholarship, I would NEVER consider awarding it to a student who was only interested in tech stuff (see subject). Why would we want to "encourage growth in the tech sector"? There's too many techies out there as it is. You need to be a well-rounded student if you want to have any hope of getting a scholarship.
Truth be told, at the undergrad level, most CS programs are the same. If you WANT to go to a high-powered school (and, ergo, spend all that money), more power to you. I think going to a high powered school is more important for your graduate degree, but here's a list, anyways:
MIT, Stanford, Carnegie Mellon, Berkeley, Cornell, Illinois, Washington, Princeton, Texas...
Of course, if you already know what you want to specialize in (which, to me, sounds like you're DEAD SET on software engineering), then you might want to look in to a school that specializes in software. I would be willing to bet, though, that a BS from your state's top public school is just as good as a BS from any of these places.
Bill Woessner
---
Bill Woessner
National Instruments
Quantum linguistics: Until you looked, this message was in Spanish.
EXCELLENT!
---
Bill Woessner
National Instruments
Quantum linguistics: Until you looked, this message was in Spanish.
I cannot believe I wasted an hour and a half of my life, not to mention something like $7 watching that movie. I would have just left, but I make it a policy not to walk out of a movie I paid for, in hopes that it might actually get better. As far as being scary? Please. It was about as transparent as "Scream". I wish I'd brought a booklight and a good book with me.
---
Bill Woessner
National Instruments
Quantum linguistics: Until you looked, this message was in Spanish.