My own view is that all forms of government are like food, they all spoil with time. Democracy just spoils slower than the rest. Any human monarchy will implode given some time as either idiots, the power hungry or just plain bastards come into power. If nothing else democracy makes sure that at least a good number of the rulers don't stay in power long enough to become too used to the position.
It has existed in various forms before that, it is simply an extension of religious freedom which has existed in Rome for example (as long as you made a gesture of loyalty to the emperor which unfortunately was against Jewish and Christian views). It is interesting to note that the Roman Empire/Republic had a rather large amount of such freedom and is seen as a rather good place. On the other hand the next thousand years in the same area had very little such freedom and is looked down upon with horror.
The new theme is too bulky, inconsistent on different platforms, and inferior to the highly refined and very user friendly theme of 1.5 (this is despite late efforts by Mozilla to spruce up the icon set and improve consistency)
I agree but you can download new themes or even the old FF theme, so wtf would this stop you from using FF 2.0?
Antiphishing technology is both weak (blacklist based)
Why does this matter, it wasn't in FF 1.5 so why would its existence even if it's not great be a drawback?
The new Options dialog box is confusing, poorly designed, and illogically hides important features
I've found that to have always been the case, long live google and about:config.
There are many reported compatibility issues with the large existing libraries of extensions, themes, and plugins currently avaialble for earlier versions of Firefox. While this can, to some degree, be expected, the loss of this huge user contributed extension base is a non-trivial problem with Firefox 2.0, and could be a deal breaker for some people all by itself
Nightly tester tools and the author seems to not understand that extensions are very often (always?) open source. Anyone can unpack and fix extensions if needed. Hell all my extensions work once I disabled compatibility.
The well known memory leak issue, which causes the Firefox browser to consume ever increasing amounts of RAM, eventually leading to sluggish performance and crashes, has been carried over into yet another generation. This is despite an enormous amount of public commentary and user requests for resolution prior to release of a new version of Firefox
It's not a memory leak in the sense of doing nothing increasing memory usage so that inaccurate. Second of all it exists, probably worse even, in 1.5 so why the fuck would it stop someone from upgrading? Has the author so run out of ideas as to list any and all faults of FF?
Notable among these is a continued problem with certain aspects of Yahoo! mail
Continued as in it existed in 1.5? LEt me repeat my point again: "wtf is this a reason to not upgrade, you already have the problem with the current version."
# Reports indicate that episodes of random freezing during use are worse with the 2.0 version, though a cause has not yet been isolated # Numerous users have reported that the History bar is buggy, and that in some instances - for unknown reasons - will not display recent items when the history menu is opened as a side panel
FF has lots of fun rare bugs which does not mean everyone or even many people will get them. Just make a backup of your profile folder beforehand and downgrade if you are unlucky enough to get such bugs.
Not quite. Society, at least a large portion of it, does not seem to consider it wrong to download copyrighted material illegally. Nor do we seem to consider it wrong to share copyrighted material with others. So therefore, they cannot consider it a good compromise to allow a limited monopoly. If We did, people wouldn't infringe, right?
Your point, just because a lot of people have no qualms about stealing, murder or hard drug use with no restrictions doesn't mean that everyone does. If you only hear about 0.5% of events and all of them are about people doing X is doesn't mean that everyone does X.
When the laws and Society have a parting of ways, it can be particularly painful, especially for those on the leading edge of change.
What charge? Your delusions of grandeur while hilarious are but also a bit frightening. If society really wanted to abolish copyrights they could, most people either don't care or think it's a good system. Most of the rest are such poor bums that they need something to legitimize their own moral shortcomings other than their own lack of morals.
First of all I'm a dual US-EU citizen and lack much nationalism for any country.
Honestly, I don't see any country which is better than the US for an intelligent, sometimes driven individual in terms of opportunities. While there has been some erosion of personal freedoms and various systems are fucked (patent system, copyright, social security, etc.) I keep reading similar problems in other countries. England is going big brother on its people, France and Germany has a screwed over society in term of work, Eastern Europe is just a cluster fuck.
At worst I'll make my money and wait till the shit is flying at the fan and then leave, the joy of having dual citizenship.
...okay: 1) Christ, you're an idiot. 2) Because all those server-to-server connections are secure or close to it, as is your computer and those servers. An open/semi-open wireless link is pretty much by definition insecure without additional measures so guess which connection needs to be made secure?
...most people click yes, if they get a prompt every hour of using their computer they will just start clicking yes all the time making the security less than worthless. The only way for this to work is with restrictive system wide DRM, in other words you only get to run software that MS says you can run.
You don't get to decide that using Mac OS X in this fashion benefits Apple, therefore it's okay in the context your own moral or logical framework for people to pirate it and so on.
Sure you do, assuming that is your moral or ethical system. Heck that is the definition of what is being done as someone is perfectly free to decide whatever they want to be moral or ethical. The trick comes in convincing other people of that and dealing with any consequences if it doesn't agree with societies morals/ethics/laws. It should be noted that what a company desires need not be either legal or ethical (by most standards) so again you can't simply use what a company says. Heck, the law need not be ethical or moral either.
Apple is the entity that gets to decide, and they have.
No, Apple has no choice but to decide this way as any other choice allows for commercial use of (or high possibility of) OS X on non-apple hardware. Whether or not they really mind the personal use of OS X on non-apple platforms (for say experimentation, testing, playing around, etc.) is unknown and must be unknown for legal reasons.
What exactly IS your point? You've got your head so far Apple's backside you can't even write a coherent argument.
You state that OS X on non-apple hardware is neither stable nor production quality. Legality in terms of licenses is of little importance for personal use and no sane company would use such an unstable product so your "points" are redundant. As a result it is only viable for those individuals who either lack money or wish to play around with OS X, neither of whom is going to buy a Mac instead.
So instead of letting them see how OS X is, and potentially get hooked enough to buy a mac later (to have a stable and production quality version) you want them to simply never use OS X period? Yeah, I hope you never go run a company.
Of course this assumes the validity of your claims that it is not viable for everyday productive use due to lack of updates and stability.
If you're going to tell people to shut up every time they post something you disagree with and can't counter why the fuck are you even posting on slashdot?
E-books should cost less than paper books damnit not more (note that I can sell used books). And companies wonder why no one buys their overpriced DRM filled crap then try to shove more of it down our throats hoping we've somehow become idiots in the meantime. If I remember correctly Baen are the only ones who actually make money on ebooks and they sell non-drm cheaper-than-paper-version ebooks.
If you need to go to a library to get a book or magazine then you may as well use their subscription access to online databases. Most of the New York Times is online as are hundreds of publications which I'd have trouble finding at anything but very well stocked universities.
*shrugs* Your point? Difference between wanting students to learn about some religion (or religions in general) and a specific religion, the former is no different from say a class on ethics or history.
I don't really buy your tuition argument either, since tuition (at a public school, at least) is rarely enough to actually cover the costs of educating a student. The money comes form elsewhere, such as (gasp) sporting events or taxes.
More often it probably comes, well at good schools, from donations (alumni and in some cases non-alumni) and possibly patents (universities get a cut of whatever is made there).
A worm spreads on its own, by say scanning the network or sending emails to everyone in your address book.
A virus infects other files but doesn't actively spread to other systems. They may use exploits to infect the system but they may simply wait for another idiot to click on the exe they infected. So when Bob gets that floppy from you he may get infected.
Trojans do not self-replciate at all and usually are designed to control a computer or steal data.
So neither trojans nor many viruses would be stopped by a secure OS assuming the user ran them as "root" which most users would do. Worms would also not be stopped if they did not use exploits to spread, for example by sending themselves as emails or IMs.
Why are you sensitive about a question that nobody ever asked you? These are simply the qualities that the gpp looks for in an employee. It's not like you're interviewing to work in his group or anything.
Sometimes I feel like pointing things out to people in case they may learn from what I say (or not or whatever). If you post it on the internet prepare to be criticized for it; if you can't ignore, accept or counter the criticism get off the internet.
One way or another, these are all reasonable things to investigate in order to find out whether or not a perspective employee will fit in at the company. Would you want to start at a new job and find out that you just can't work within their culture?
I'm simply pointing out that I find it a stupid culture, ignore me if you want which you are free to do.
In any case, I know that if I were interviewing you and I heard answers like that; I wouldn't hire you.
So in other words if a potential employ questions exactly what you mean and exactly how well your company works you don't want them? Well I know where I DON'T want to work, thank you very much. Anyway, my questions are all valid things a potential employee may implicitly or explicitly ask themselves about a company (I know I would). And of course I'd lie my ass off on the interview regarding things like that.
Can they work with people? Are you capable of hiring a manager who can keep the stupidity of your company from reaching me? Are you capable of hiring managers who can deal with the team members and keep sanity or is that going to be my implicit job?
Can they dress well? If you mean clean jeans, t-shirt and sneakers (optional in the coding area itself) then yes otherwise no. At best you get slacks, polo shirt and nice looking sneakers. That is unless the job involves dealing with other companies or people in which case proper attire only for such meetings. Are they capable of staying after normal work hours every now and then to see to something getting finished? Are you capable of paying me for it and/or otherwise compensating me? Are you capable of keeping this a rare event and hopefully one whose date is known in advance?
Are they sensitive to other people and their surroundings? Are you capable of hiring people who aren't incapable of living outside an emotional bubble?
Yup and weight depends on the person I guess. The ones who can't move anything except their chin may weight even more than 600lbs as they need a lot of life support equipment (redundant batteries for breathing equipment, etc.) and usually are overweight (not easy to exercises in such a position).
So you take a cab, or you rent a vehicle, or you pay to have it shipped.
You can afford to do this because you're not sinking money into car insurance, maintenance, or the cost of buying a car in the first place.
Having the weakly groceries shipped sure is cost efficient... You probably waste so much time without a car (walking places, taking the subway when the car would be just as good) that the savings hardly even out if you had instead worked for that amount of time. Note that your later statement about earning more also goes against your views as if you earn more your time is worth more so owning a car costs less due to how much time it saves you. Of course renting and taxis also cause you to waste time not just money.
And because you live and work in a world-class commercial hub, chances are you earn more to begin with, too.
A lot of people in NYC don't earn that much; many of them probably don't own cars due to the insane costs of doing so in NYC which forces them to not really have an option.
If you have severe disabilities, you'd consider yourself lucky to live within a 20-minute ambulance ride of some of the world's best hospitals with access to top talent and facilities, as you would if you lived on, say, the UWS of Manhattan.
Most people with such disabilities probably die of "stress" as the care they need isn't that difficult. Note that if they had to use public transit (notice that my point was that public transit fails in various cases not that it fails in NYC) they would die much sooner due to the immense stress it would involve.
There's a reason New York City has one of the longest life expectancies of any city in the nation.
So in a discussion about public transportation in general where I cite problems prevalent with it wherever it exists you respond by saying "well in NYC." So in other words your answer is that my problems only have solutions if you live in NYC?
What extra freedom? If you'd chosen to live somewhere that had been built around public transit, you wouldn't need to go off the map to begin with.
BS and I've lived in NYC (which from what I've seen has a very good public transit system) for much of my life.
Wants to go shopping for many things, or buy them at an inexpensive store or buy specialty items? Have fun dragging them back through subways and busses.
Want to buy something large (say a desk)? Hope you enjoy dragging that on a dolly for 10 blocks and down subway stairs (or paying to have it shipped to you).
Want to get somewhere quickly or at night? Hope you find a Taxi (1.5 hours by public transportation vs. 20 minutes by car for some routes).
Is it hot and humid out? Enjoy cooking on your 10 minutes walk to the station, your 5 minute wait in the station for the train and then another 10 minutes when you get off
If you have severe disabilities all of that probably goes up by a few factors, I doubt people with 600lbs (life support + them) of mass would have much fun on public transportation.
To add to the previous regarding being in college. Nothing changes, they may be a bit nicer but expecting things to be spoon fed to you is stupid. And now I can expect you to be able to both know and do better on your own.
You should be looking for summer research and internship opportunities, or summer programs in general. You should be joining various organizations such as SIAM as they may have connections. You should be attending talks and lectures. You should be talking to professors and trying to do research. You should be talking to professors in general and seeing if they can help you get ahead in any way.
You should be taking more advanced courses instead of easier ones even if it they won't be as easy. Don't know the perquisites? Ask the professor and study them up the quarter/semester before on your own.
You can tranfer from a community college to good schools however it probably requires dedication if you have a GED. Also even with a GED you can do interesting things which may catch a good unis. eye (good schools look at things other than grades and diplomas).
I agree mostly however at the same time this is quite a bit your fault and your parents fault (more your parents as I can't expect a child to know or do most of this on their own). You're smart? Good then there are 20 and a half ways to get around the school's requirements. If you bitch enough and have something to back yourself up with (or better yet if your parents do this for you) then school administrators will bend and break after a while. My middle school caved in damn fast when they started getting back angry letters from the state education commissioner about why they're not doing anything for me.
Can study on your own? Then do so or have parents who force you to do so. After that options open up, schools can't fight paperwork (ie: pass the AP exam and the school can't make you take lower level classes), you can apply to college level summer programs (which pay for you to attend), etc.
Got money? Go take long distance courses from one of probably two dozen universities (including top ones).
Don't have as much money? Take courses at one of your local colleges, some of which may even have programs specifically for this.
Have even less money or no such colleges/programs? Talk to the colleges, you may not get official transferable credit but letters from professors (that you did all the work and got some grade) may very well be enough for your high school.
That's not even counting the various programs that may be applicable (Davidson is one, probably others exist) for gifted children. If nothing else these can bitch at the school for you and probably with better efficiency. That's not even counting the final, or first depending on your views, option of simply skipping grades or going to college/high school early.
Me? I never took math at school since 6th grade (long distance calculus course in 6th grade + passing calc. AP exam), I graduated a year early with all requirements at a high school where the first thing they tell you is that no one ever graduates early (helps to have an assistant principal who is helpful even when no one else is, still took 3 years of fighting), I went to a very good college with mediocre grades (by having very odd but also impressive looking extra-curricular things), etc.
Welcome to the real world where you have to fight for things not expect them to be given to you on a silver platter. Don't talk about school not allowing creativity when you yourself never did anything creative to fight them.
Slashdot Mirror
I needed that laugh thanks, you were trying to amuse me right?
As for the second part, let's just say I'm well off enough to have no need to boost my ego by showing off to some slashdot anon.
My own view is that all forms of government are like food, they all spoil with time. Democracy just spoils slower than the rest. Any human monarchy will implode given some time as either idiots, the power hungry or just plain bastards come into power. If nothing else democracy makes sure that at least a good number of the rulers don't stay in power long enough to become too used to the position.
It has existed in various forms before that, it is simply an extension of religious freedom which has existed in Rome for example (as long as you made a gesture of loyalty to the emperor which unfortunately was against Jewish and Christian views). It is interesting to note that the Roman Empire/Republic had a rather large amount of such freedom and is seen as a rather good place. On the other hand the next thousand years in the same area had very little such freedom and is looked down upon with horror.
The blind look towards the past and envision utopias while unable to see all the filth their little eden swam in.
Let's see now:
The new theme is too bulky, inconsistent on different platforms, and inferior to the highly refined and very user friendly theme of 1.5 (this is despite late efforts by Mozilla to spruce up the icon set and improve consistency)
I agree but you can download new themes or even the old FF theme, so wtf would this stop you from using FF 2.0?
Antiphishing technology is both weak (blacklist based)
Why does this matter, it wasn't in FF 1.5 so why would its existence even if it's not great be a drawback?
The new Options dialog box is confusing, poorly designed, and illogically hides important features
I've found that to have always been the case, long live google and about:config.
There are many reported compatibility issues with the large existing libraries of extensions, themes, and plugins currently avaialble for earlier versions of Firefox. While this can, to some degree, be expected, the loss of this huge user contributed extension base is a non-trivial problem with Firefox 2.0, and could be a deal breaker for some people all by itself
Nightly tester tools and the author seems to not understand that extensions are very often (always?) open source. Anyone can unpack and fix extensions if needed. Hell all my extensions work once I disabled compatibility.
The well known memory leak issue, which causes the Firefox browser to consume ever increasing amounts of RAM, eventually leading to sluggish performance and crashes, has been carried over into yet another generation. This is despite an enormous amount of public commentary and user requests for resolution prior to release of a new version of Firefox
It's not a memory leak in the sense of doing nothing increasing memory usage so that inaccurate. Second of all it exists, probably worse even, in 1.5 so why the fuck would it stop someone from upgrading? Has the author so run out of ideas as to list any and all faults of FF?
Notable among these is a continued problem with certain aspects of Yahoo! mail
Continued as in it existed in 1.5? LEt me repeat my point again: "wtf is this a reason to not upgrade, you already have the problem with the current version."
# Reports indicate that episodes of random freezing during use are worse with the 2.0 version, though a cause has not yet been isolated
# Numerous users have reported that the History bar is buggy, and that in some instances - for unknown reasons - will not display recent items when the history menu is opened as a side panel
FF has lots of fun rare bugs which does not mean everyone or even many people will get them. Just make a backup of your profile folder beforehand and downgrade if you are unlucky enough to get such bugs.
Not quite. Society, at least a large portion of it, does not seem to consider it wrong to download copyrighted material illegally. Nor do we seem to consider it wrong to share copyrighted material with others. So therefore, they cannot consider it a good compromise to allow a limited monopoly. If We did, people wouldn't infringe, right?
Your point, just because a lot of people have no qualms about stealing, murder or hard drug use with no restrictions doesn't mean that everyone does. If you only hear about 0.5% of events and all of them are about people doing X is doesn't mean that everyone does X.
When the laws and Society have a parting of ways, it can be particularly painful, especially for those on the leading edge of change.
What charge? Your delusions of grandeur while hilarious are but also a bit frightening. If society really wanted to abolish copyrights they could, most people either don't care or think it's a good system. Most of the rest are such poor bums that they need something to legitimize their own moral shortcomings other than their own lack of morals.
First of all I'm a dual US-EU citizen and lack much nationalism for any country.
Honestly, I don't see any country which is better than the US for an intelligent, sometimes driven individual in terms of opportunities. While there has been some erosion of personal freedoms and various systems are fucked (patent system, copyright, social security, etc.) I keep reading similar problems in other countries. England is going big brother on its people, France and Germany has a screwed over society in term of work, Eastern Europe is just a cluster fuck.
At worst I'll make my money and wait till the shit is flying at the fan and then leave, the joy of having dual citizenship.
...okay:
1) Christ, you're an idiot.
2) Because all those server-to-server connections are secure or close to it, as is your computer and those servers. An open/semi-open wireless link is pretty much by definition insecure without additional measures so guess which connection needs to be made secure?
...most people click yes, if they get a prompt every hour of using their computer they will just start clicking yes all the time making the security less than worthless. The only way for this to work is with restrictive system wide DRM, in other words you only get to run software that MS says you can run.
You don't get to decide that using Mac OS X in this fashion benefits Apple, therefore it's okay in the context your own moral or logical framework for people to pirate it and so on.
Sure you do, assuming that is your moral or ethical system. Heck that is the definition of what is being done as someone is perfectly free to decide whatever they want to be moral or ethical. The trick comes in convincing other people of that and dealing with any consequences if it doesn't agree with societies morals/ethics/laws. It should be noted that what a company desires need not be either legal or ethical (by most standards) so again you can't simply use what a company says. Heck, the law need not be ethical or moral either.
Apple is the entity that gets to decide, and they have.
No, Apple has no choice but to decide this way as any other choice allows for commercial use of (or high possibility of) OS X on non-apple hardware. Whether or not they really mind the personal use of OS X on non-apple platforms (for say experimentation, testing, playing around, etc.) is unknown and must be unknown for legal reasons.
What exactly IS your point? You've got your head so far Apple's backside you can't even write a coherent argument.
You state that OS X on non-apple hardware is neither stable nor production quality. Legality in terms of licenses is of little importance for personal use and no sane company would use such an unstable product so your "points" are redundant. As a result it is only viable for those individuals who either lack money or wish to play around with OS X, neither of whom is going to buy a Mac instead.
So instead of letting them see how OS X is, and potentially get hooked enough to buy a mac later (to have a stable and production quality version) you want them to simply never use OS X period? Yeah, I hope you never go run a company.
Of course this assumes the validity of your claims that it is not viable for everyday productive use due to lack of updates and stability.
If you're going to tell people to shut up every time they post something you disagree with and can't counter why the fuck are you even posting on slashdot?
E-books should cost less than paper books damnit not more (note that I can sell used books). And companies wonder why no one buys their overpriced DRM filled crap then try to shove more of it down our throats hoping we've somehow become idiots in the meantime. If I remember correctly Baen are the only ones who actually make money on ebooks and they sell non-drm cheaper-than-paper-version ebooks.
If you need to go to a library to get a book or magazine then you may as well use their subscription access to online databases. Most of the New York Times is online as are hundreds of publications which I'd have trouble finding at anything but very well stocked universities.
*shrugs* Your point? Difference between wanting students to learn about some religion (or religions in general) and a specific religion, the former is no different from say a class on ethics or history.
I don't really buy your tuition argument either, since tuition (at a public school, at least) is rarely enough to actually cover the costs of educating a student. The money comes form elsewhere, such as (gasp) sporting events or taxes.
More often it probably comes, well at good schools, from donations (alumni and in some cases non-alumni) and possibly patents (universities get a cut of whatever is made there).
A worm spreads on its own, by say scanning the network or sending emails to everyone in your address book.
A virus infects other files but doesn't actively spread to other systems. They may use exploits to infect the system but they may simply wait for another idiot to click on the exe they infected. So when Bob gets that floppy from you he may get infected.
Trojans do not self-replciate at all and usually are designed to control a computer or steal data.
So neither trojans nor many viruses would be stopped by a secure OS assuming the user ran them as "root" which most users would do. Worms would also not be stopped if they did not use exploits to spread, for example by sending themselves as emails or IMs.
Why are you sensitive about a question that nobody ever asked you? These are simply the qualities that the gpp looks for in an employee. It's not like you're interviewing to work in his group or anything.
Sometimes I feel like pointing things out to people in case they may learn from what I say (or not or whatever). If you post it on the internet prepare to be criticized for it; if you can't ignore, accept or counter the criticism get off the internet.
One way or another, these are all reasonable things to investigate in order to find out whether or not a perspective employee will fit in at the company. Would you want to start at a new job and find out that you just can't work within their culture?
I'm simply pointing out that I find it a stupid culture, ignore me if you want which you are free to do.
In any case, I know that if I were interviewing you and I heard answers like that; I wouldn't hire you.
So in other words if a potential employ questions exactly what you mean and exactly how well your company works you don't want them? Well I know where I DON'T want to work, thank you very much. Anyway, my questions are all valid things a potential employee may implicitly or explicitly ask themselves about a company (I know I would). And of course I'd lie my ass off on the interview regarding things like that.
Can they work with people?
Are you capable of hiring a manager who can keep the stupidity of your company from reaching me? Are you capable of hiring managers who can deal with the team members and keep sanity or is that going to be my implicit job?
Can they dress well?
If you mean clean jeans, t-shirt and sneakers (optional in the coding area itself) then yes otherwise no. At best you get slacks, polo shirt and nice looking sneakers. That is unless the job involves dealing with other companies or people in which case proper attire only for such meetings.
Are they capable of staying after normal work hours every now and then to see to something getting finished?
Are you capable of paying me for it and/or otherwise compensating me? Are you capable of keeping this a rare event and hopefully one whose date is known in advance?
Are they sensitive to other people and their surroundings?
Are you capable of hiring people who aren't incapable of living outside an emotional bubble?
Yup and weight depends on the person I guess.
The ones who can't move anything except their chin may weight even more than 600lbs as they need a lot of life support equipment (redundant batteries for breathing equipment, etc.) and usually are overweight (not easy to exercises in such a position).
So you take a cab, or you rent a vehicle, or you pay to have it shipped.
You can afford to do this because you're not sinking money into car insurance, maintenance, or the cost of buying a car in the first place.
Having the weakly groceries shipped sure is cost efficient...
You probably waste so much time without a car (walking places, taking the subway when the car would be just as good) that the savings hardly even out if you had instead worked for that amount of time. Note that your later statement about earning more also goes against your views as if you earn more your time is worth more so owning a car costs less due to how much time it saves you. Of course renting and taxis also cause you to waste time not just money.
And because you live and work in a world-class commercial hub, chances are you earn more to begin with, too.
A lot of people in NYC don't earn that much; many of them probably don't own cars due to the insane costs of doing so in NYC which forces them to not really have an option.
If you have severe disabilities, you'd consider yourself lucky to live within a 20-minute ambulance ride of some of the world's best hospitals with access to top talent and facilities, as you would if you lived on, say, the UWS of Manhattan.
Most people with such disabilities probably die of "stress" as the care they need isn't that difficult. Note that if they had to use public transit (notice that my point was that public transit fails in various cases not that it fails in NYC) they would die much sooner due to the immense stress it would involve.
There's a reason New York City has one of the longest life expectancies of any city in the nation.
So in a discussion about public transportation in general where I cite problems prevalent with it wherever it exists you respond by saying "well in NYC." So in other words your answer is that my problems only have solutions if you live in NYC?
What extra freedom? If you'd chosen to live somewhere that had been built around public transit, you wouldn't need to go off the map to begin with.
BS and I've lived in NYC (which from what I've seen has a very good public transit system) for much of my life.
Wants to go shopping for many things, or buy them at an inexpensive store or buy specialty items? Have fun dragging them back through subways and busses.
Want to buy something large (say a desk)? Hope you enjoy dragging that on a dolly for 10 blocks and down subway stairs (or paying to have it shipped to you).
Want to get somewhere quickly or at night? Hope you find a Taxi (1.5 hours by public transportation vs. 20 minutes by car for some routes).
Is it hot and humid out? Enjoy cooking on your 10 minutes walk to the station, your 5 minute wait in the station for the train and then another 10 minutes when you get off
If you have severe disabilities all of that probably goes up by a few factors, I doubt people with 600lbs (life support + them) of mass would have much fun on public transportation.
To add to the previous regarding being in college. Nothing changes, they may be a bit nicer but expecting things to be spoon fed to you is stupid. And now I can expect you to be able to both know and do better on your own.
You should be looking for summer research and internship opportunities, or summer programs in general. You should be joining various organizations such as SIAM as they may have connections. You should be attending talks and lectures. You should be talking to professors and trying to do research. You should be talking to professors in general and seeing if they can help you get ahead in any way.
You should be taking more advanced courses instead of easier ones even if it they won't be as easy. Don't know the perquisites? Ask the professor and study them up the quarter/semester before on your own.
You can tranfer from a community college to good schools however it probably requires dedication if you have a GED. Also even with a GED you can do interesting things which may catch a good unis. eye (good schools look at things other than grades and diplomas).
I agree mostly however at the same time this is quite a bit your fault and your parents fault (more your parents as I can't expect a child to know or do most of this on their own). You're smart? Good then there are 20 and a half ways to get around the school's requirements. If you bitch enough and have something to back yourself up with (or better yet if your parents do this for you) then school administrators will bend and break after a while. My middle school caved in damn fast when they started getting back angry letters from the state education commissioner about why they're not doing anything for me.
Can study on your own? Then do so or have parents who force you to do so. After that options open up, schools can't fight paperwork (ie: pass the AP exam and the school can't make you take lower level classes), you can apply to college level summer programs (which pay for you to attend), etc.
Got money? Go take long distance courses from one of probably two dozen universities (including top ones).
Don't have as much money? Take courses at one of your local colleges, some of which may even have programs specifically for this.
Have even less money or no such colleges/programs? Talk to the colleges, you may not get official transferable credit but letters from professors (that you did all the work and got some grade) may very well be enough for your high school.
That's not even counting the various programs that may be applicable (Davidson is one, probably others exist) for gifted children. If nothing else these can bitch at the school for you and probably with better efficiency. That's not even counting the final, or first depending on your views, option of simply skipping grades or going to college/high school early.
Me? I never took math at school since 6th grade (long distance calculus course in 6th grade + passing calc. AP exam), I graduated a year early with all requirements at a high school where the first thing they tell you is that no one ever graduates early (helps to have an assistant principal who is helpful even when no one else is, still took 3 years of fighting), I went to a very good college with mediocre grades (by having very odd but also impressive looking extra-curricular things), etc.
Welcome to the real world where you have to fight for things not expect them to be given to you on a silver platter. Don't talk about school not allowing creativity when you yourself never did anything creative to fight them.