I used to be for mandatory voting until I realized that stupid people would vote anyway
The very reason we have the democratic and republican parties is that the voting public is already comprised largely of the stupid. Given the realities of the Gaussian, most of what's that's left should be smarter people.
I would like to see a requirement that in order to get certain benefits, one MUST have voted in the prior election AND filed the prior year's tax forms.
Uh-uh. Many of the poor don't file taxes, and it's perfectly legit. Your idea would lock them out of any active political role in determining their own destinies. You can't lock people out of voting. Period.
I'd also like to see congressmen who vote for something that's bad for the country, solely to screw the other party, be stripped of their citizenship and deported.
I'd substitute "unconstitutional" for "bad for the country", and remove "solely to screw the other party", and make them stay here so their fellow citizens could sneer at them on a regular basis, but yeah. If you enter public service, and you don't serve the public, I figure that's maximum bad behavior with absolutely huge harm. Worse than anything else on the books. Seriously. Murderer kills what, a few people? Bad law hurts people by the tens or hundreds of thousands or even (drug laws, for example) millions, tens of millions.
I'm honestly quite surprised that one of the more severely injured victims of bad law -- and there's plenty of it, and of them -- hasn't already taken their mistreatment directly to the source(s) as a matter of some well-deserved kickback. Still, only a matter of time, I'm thinking. All it takes is one person with not much more to lose and a good reason. Good reason being trivially available in prolific amounts, the rest is just a matter of social Russian roulette for congress and SCOTUS.
I've seen cases where the SQLite DB just corrupted itself without any hardware issue or power cycling.
I haven't -- I've seen cases where the filesystem corrupted itself (with or without the help of hardware failure, no idea), but I've used SQLite most extensively (seriously, I bet I'm close to having used every feature in the thing) in its various revisions for years, as have tens of thousands of my users consequent to my incorporation of same, and I've heard of, and experienced, exactly zero events of DB failure (and one of my most popular apps would have crapped itself and gone blind if such happened, so I'd surely have heard about it.)
Also, different app (SdrDx), but I use it the other way around here; I've got an SQLite DB on my website that tracks startups of the code as to version, revision, step, beta status, platform (windows, OSX), time, date and IP, as part of the handshake that lets the users know if there are any upgrades (in-app title bar notification, nothing invasive.) This lets me keep track, somewhat, how many people are using what version of the app. SdrDx is well over 15 thousand regular users, many more that aren't regular, and the DB is moderately busy as a result, again, no problems. The writes to this particular DB are pretty straightforward, but the queries I've written for it span a decent range of futzing about. No problems to date. Of course it's backed up, but no need for a backup as yet.
I'm also presently using it, again extensively, in an incomplete, but complete enough for my day to day use, DSLR application of mine, code compiled in, along the lines of Lightroom and Aperture, and again, zero DB failures of any kind. Oodles of DB activity for every image, every library op, every bit of auto-categorizing, library backup, tagging, annotating, posted-to recording, flagging, versioning, plug-in and plug-in settings recording, and so on.
So I'm going to go with... possible, but even slightly likely. Also, any DB can take a crap if the drive underneath it goes bad, or the OS (or some all too clever use of root privs) allows corruption of its storage. None of which should be construed as any kind of criticism of any DB engine subject to the same.
Also, did you report these purported corruption events to the author of SQLite? Sure hope you did.:/
Voting democrat or republican is voting for status quo.
Just to accidentally veer back on topic for a moment (it won't last, don't worry), mandatory voting, at least if it allows write-ins, might do something a bit unexpected, too. A lot of people don't vote because they think (know, actually) that voting for either of the mainstream political parties is voting for more of "the same", where "the same" is not a good thing by the vast majority of measures.
Force them to vote, they may go, "ok, fine, I'll vote, but you won't like it." And consider: With only 37% voting previously, those people could ALL be outvoted by the new influx. This could be a huge win for 3rd parties / candidates.
Such a result would amuse the hell out of me. And it could be really, really good for the country.
So bring it on, I say. Remains to be seen if the votes of those who simply aren't engaged (the ignorant by virtue of busy or poor education... the stupid are pretty much accounted for already) would tear us a new one. But hey, the new one isn't likely to be worse than the one we've got now.
By only considering "human", I believe you are overlooking the obvious endgame for AI. We're headed directly for the perfect race, and we're defeinitely going to get there, too. It just isn't going to be a version of us.
That sounds good. The problem is, and will always be, that you may have the right ethics handled, but somewhere else, someone doesn't, and they'll just create and use the tech against you in an environment where you've not looked at it in a real world sense, and properly compensated for it to the extent that is possible.
Services and users high quality facial recognition can be plugged into: CIA, FBI, NSA, state police, local police, bill collectors, "bounty hunters", stalkers, paparazzi, computer security, club membership and virtually every other kind of venue/door lock, real or virtual, sorting your own photos, detecting use of your face in otherwise un-discoverable venues, plus basically about any kind of surveillance you can think of.
See, here's the thing. If they have your face, and they're hunting for a match, that's pretty bad already in terms of your privacy, but it requires that they already have your face and a specific existing concern, so therefore a reason to go looking for you.
But a sufficiently powerful system that can identify you generally -- see your face, associate your identity -- can track you (along with everyone else) when they're not looking for you. The implications for privacy and government misbehavior are extremely negative.
Underlying this is that our system of law is riddled with bad law, for bad reasons, with bad consequences. Copyright, drug use, sexuality, all serve as good examples of issues that the government sees one way, and significant numbers of citizens see somewhat differently. When your private, consensual behavior is unobserved, this causes far less (although certainly not zero) problems. When you are observed all the time... I think we can look for serious negative social impacts.
And for many tasks, you don't need any of that. Have a look at SQLite3 (also, it's built into Python, which can be handy.)
Worried about stability? You can compile the SQLite3 source code right into your project. That way, your databases always match your shipping product, indefinitely, period.
It's not usable for everything -- only a decent subset of SQL is supported -- but you might be surprised at just how much is there, and working well.
Whilst what you say is true there's the refilling time to take into account.
Most electrics "refill" overnight, whil(e|st) you're sleeping. Does your ICE based car do that? No. CAN it do that? No.
Depending on the range used -- not the range it's capable of, but the range used -- the EV may never, ever have to be charged outside of the home, overnight. This is actually a very common scenario.
See, these are things you have to take into account: You can't reliably think of an EV the way you think of an ICV. Many of the "problems" people imagine are primarily the domain of the ICV, and apply either not at all, or differently, to an EV, in most common usage scenarios.
Now, me, I need range -- it's 290 miles to the nearest decent city in my state from where I live, and I have to go there more or less regularly (medical reasons... but they also have restaurants, music, shopping... so it's always worthy for me and my SO.) And then when I *get* there, I usually end up driving around quite a bit. So EV's, at least at the moment, are highly problematic for me. But I recognize that I am very much the exception.
I'd *still* like to have an EV for use locally -- then I'd be one of those "charge overnight" people, just taking the ICV out when a long trip is called for, or snow makes the EV unable to get around, with no possible way of using up the EV's range puttering around our little 1-mile across town, or even with a 20 mile (so 40 round trip) jaunt out to the lake, something we also do regularly in the summer months.
it's not okay to post a picture of a naked arse (which won't screw anyone up, ever, but might marginally offend the easily-offended, especially if they happen to have a very screwed up set of priorities).
You have to account for the effect of the hysterical telling people their "lives are ruined" because X happened. That's the real driver for the vast majority of the sexual neurosis in the USA: backwards, puritanical pinheads who value harmful rhetoric over people's sense of self under any circumstance that has anything at all to do with sexuality, direct or indirect.
Hi, I'm from the More Nipples Party and I'm running for president.
I predict you will have to remain stiff in the face of strong opposition; support is key, as it raises your points in the face of the electorate, and helps to project your main tips as to how your new political stance will affect us. I hope your platform will also incorporate a significant transparency component, so that instead of relying on Internet searches, we can directly view the issues at hand. With careful planning, I'm sure you can get at least the male portion of the electorate thinking of your campaign every few seconds without fail. And remember to keep it real, and keep it natural. While no one likes a sagging economy, propping up with what amounts to nothing more than plastic bags won't fool most voters. We can read a curve -- we know the real thing when we see it.
Or, are you really suggesting that "And we must not put people who are not actually guilty in jail. Ever."...?
Missed that, sorry. Of course it is a terrible, terrible thing to jail or otherwise punish someone who is innocent. But jail does differ from the death penalty in one critical way: You can let them back out. You can't revive a dead person. That's game over.
Having said that, yes, when tech gets that far, assuming it does, we should never again jail or even accuse an innocent. It's absolutely horrible that we do. If we can ask "did you do it?" and get back a reality-based "no", then all that citizen need do is go on with their life. No arrest, no record, no nothing.
From the POV of the prisoner, prison is exile. For most, it is even permanent -- because when they get out, society no longer offers them the ability to move on with their lives on anything even remotely resembling that of other citizens. Instead, they are relegated to a permanent lower class, with records that prevent employment, destroy credit, affect passports, 2nd amendment rights, IIRC voting rights in some places, even where and how they can live. IMHO, this is because Americans are perfectly comfortable with unending retribution and thrive on useless, vicious gossip.
Still, it might be interesting to see a large urban area, otherwise close to useless, as in "Escape from New York" be turned into a "drop 'em off and forget about 'em" walled exile region. Fly in food and airdrop it. Otherwise, survival of the fittest, etc. Or even one of the least populated states -- Wyoming comes to mind -- but this is like the death penalty, because it is extremely harsh, and would be damned difficult to "undo." So for that, again, I'd just as soon we wait until we can assure actual guilt, as opposed to "we say you're guilty."
Is letting the innocent rot in jail for 60+ years until they die from (un)natural causes is any better for that person
It certainly is if the person is innocent, because it allows them at least some chance to achieve relief, perhaps even redress, for the wrong society has done them.
As for the guilty, doesn't worry me a bit. As long as they don't get out, society has been equally improved.
The sad reality is that every day people die from mistakes, sometimes those mistakes are their own and sometimes they are the mistakes of others.
This is like trying to say that because some people die in traffic accidents, it's ok if your kid drowned in the neighbor's pool with no fence. The one has NOTHING to do with the other.
Is letting the innocent rot in jail for 60+ years until they die from (un)natural causes is any better for that person
It certainly is if the person is innocent, because it allows them at least some chance to achieve relief, perhaps even redress, for the wrong society has done them.
As for the guilty, doesn't worry me a bit. As long as they don't get out, society has been equally improved.
The sad reality is that every day people die from mistakes, sometimes those mistakes are their own and sometimes they are the mistakes of others.
This is like trying to say that because some people die in traffic accidents, it's ok if your kid drowned in the neighbor's pool with no fence. The one has NOTHING to do with the other.
I'm with you -- certain heinous crimes deserve the death penalty. However:
In many cases, we cannot be certain that the individual who has been judged guilty, actually is. We know from the various exoneration projects, where convicted death row inmates have been proven innocent with more advanced forensic techniques (DNA, etc.) that the system regularly makes horrific errors, sentencing the innocent to death. Even just a cursory understanding of how our justice system works will make any reasonable person aware that it is error-prone. And we must not put people who are not actually guilty to death. Ever.
Consequently, this is my position: Until or unless technology allows us to unequivocally, zero-possible-doubt, 100% certain determine actual guilt of the actual crime they are being tried for, we cannot afford to engage in killing as punishment without becoming the very worst kind of criminals ourselves.
So as things stand right now, I am solidly against any use of the death penalty.
you will forget almost everything important about the field within the first 5 years after leaving college
You will know almost nothing important about the field when you leave college. If you manage to work for about five-ten years actually doing engineering -- as opposed to being mired in meetings, committees, half-finished projects, retreats, and seminars -- you'll probably pick up enough to actually feel like you own that degree. Related, you run into an engineer who has real chops right out of college, and you'll realize that what you have is no more than a ghostly, incomplete outline of the real tasks you face.
When you leave college, prepare to do a *lot* more bookwork, ask a lot of questions, figure out the ebb and flow of things like (for an EE) parts availability and longevity and market cycle, FCC and UL certifications, how to actually work with mechanical engineers, manage all manner of varied computer toolchains -- pcb layout, device programming, cpu programming, source code repositories, BOM managment, project planning tools, and so on... and math. You're going to have to get very, very comfortable with at least a moderate level of math. Any cribbing and cramming done in college will have to be replaced with a concerted effort to actually wrap your head around the subject.
And then we get into the many, many specialized areas that will affect just what you need to learn. RF? Microwave (not the same as RF, trust me on this)? uP system design? Signal processing? Embedded systems? Automotive, aircraft, military, space systems? Batteries? High power systems like transmission lines? Neural designs? Medical, with its myriad sub-sub specialties, some of which are more art than science? Networking? Household? Process control? AI? Robotics? Toys and Games? Probability? Test instruments? Antenna systems (it's like RF but with with a dose of magic and a dose of art and a dose of luck and the constant interference / interaction of everything with what you're trying to accomplish)? CNC? Will you need to learn about hardening? Sonar? Radar? Beam weaponry? EMP? I guarantee you'll learn quite a bit about ESD, probably first hand if you work in a dry region...
Oh, and the reality of commercial drives and deadlines, those usually come as quite the nasty shock, too. You haven't lived until the words "ship it!" send a nasty shiver down your spine because you know more testing / characterization / documentation / special casing / something else is called for.
As my boss at Can-American Electronics back in the day told a prospective hire when he announced he had a PhD: "Well, I won't hold that against you."
And science isn't immutable truth. It's defensible belief.
Science isn't even that. Science is a method. What you put in is behavior that hopefully complies with the method, and what you get out is data, broken into empirical and behavioral observations, to which we can apply some measure of confidence. The method -- science -- is quite solid. It's the rest that is error prone. All of it. In fact, as soon as "belief" replaces carefully restrained confidence, you're already screwing up.
Well, ok. But I think your definition of "family" in the context of overpopulation needs some broadening. Marriage and so forth is not now, nor has ever been, a universal social constant.
Slashdot Mirror
The very reason we have the democratic and republican parties is that the voting public is already comprised largely of the stupid. Given the realities of the Gaussian, most of what's that's left should be smarter people.
Uh-uh. Many of the poor don't file taxes, and it's perfectly legit. Your idea would lock them out of any active political role in determining their own destinies. You can't lock people out of voting. Period.
I'd substitute "unconstitutional" for "bad for the country", and remove "solely to screw the other party", and make them stay here so their fellow citizens could sneer at them on a regular basis, but yeah. If you enter public service, and you don't serve the public, I figure that's maximum bad behavior with absolutely huge harm. Worse than anything else on the books. Seriously. Murderer kills what, a few people? Bad law hurts people by the tens or hundreds of thousands or even (drug laws, for example) millions, tens of millions.
I'm honestly quite surprised that one of the more severely injured victims of bad law -- and there's plenty of it, and of them -- hasn't already taken their mistreatment directly to the source(s) as a matter of some well-deserved kickback. Still, only a matter of time, I'm thinking. All it takes is one person with not much more to lose and a good reason. Good reason being trivially available in prolific amounts, the rest is just a matter of social Russian roulette for congress and SCOTUS.
I haven't -- I've seen cases where the filesystem corrupted itself (with or without the help of hardware failure, no idea), but I've used SQLite most extensively (seriously, I bet I'm close to having used every feature in the thing) in its various revisions for years, as have tens of thousands of my users consequent to my incorporation of same, and I've heard of, and experienced, exactly zero events of DB failure (and one of my most popular apps would have crapped itself and gone blind if such happened, so I'd surely have heard about it.)
Also, different app (SdrDx), but I use it the other way around here; I've got an SQLite DB on my website that tracks startups of the code as to version, revision, step, beta status, platform (windows, OSX), time, date and IP, as part of the handshake that lets the users know if there are any upgrades (in-app title bar notification, nothing invasive.) This lets me keep track, somewhat, how many people are using what version of the app. SdrDx is well over 15 thousand regular users, many more that aren't regular, and the DB is moderately busy as a result, again, no problems. The writes to this particular DB are pretty straightforward, but the queries I've written for it span a decent range of futzing about. No problems to date. Of course it's backed up, but no need for a backup as yet.
I'm also presently using it, again extensively, in an incomplete, but complete enough for my day to day use, DSLR application of mine, code compiled in, along the lines of Lightroom and Aperture, and again, zero DB failures of any kind. Oodles of DB activity for every image, every library op, every bit of auto-categorizing, library backup, tagging, annotating, posted-to recording, flagging, versioning, plug-in and plug-in settings recording, and so on.
So I'm going to go with... possible, but even slightly likely. Also, any DB can take a crap if the drive underneath it goes bad, or the OS (or some all too clever use of root privs) allows corruption of its storage. None of which should be construed as any kind of criticism of any DB engine subject to the same.
Also, did you report these purported corruption events to the author of SQLite? Sure hope you did. :/
Just to accidentally veer back on topic for a moment (it won't last, don't worry), mandatory voting, at least if it allows write-ins, might do something a bit unexpected, too. A lot of people don't vote because they think (know, actually) that voting for either of the mainstream political parties is voting for more of "the same", where "the same" is not a good thing by the vast majority of measures.
Force them to vote, they may go, "ok, fine, I'll vote, but you won't like it." And consider: With only 37% voting previously, those people could ALL be outvoted by the new influx. This could be a huge win for 3rd parties / candidates.
Such a result would amuse the hell out of me. And it could be really, really good for the country.
So bring it on, I say. Remains to be seen if the votes of those who simply aren't engaged (the ignorant by virtue of busy or poor education... the stupid are pretty much accounted for already) would tear us a new one. But hey, the new one isn't likely to be worse than the one we've got now.
Precisely.
By only considering "human", I believe you are overlooking the obvious endgame for AI. We're headed directly for the perfect race, and we're defeinitely going to get there, too. It just isn't going to be a version of us.
That sounds good. The problem is, and will always be, that you may have the right ethics handled, but somewhere else, someone doesn't, and they'll just create and use the tech against you in an environment where you've not looked at it in a real world sense, and properly compensated for it to the extent that is possible.
Services and users high quality facial recognition can be plugged into: CIA, FBI, NSA, state police, local police, bill collectors, "bounty hunters", stalkers, paparazzi, computer security, club membership and virtually every other kind of venue/door lock, real or virtual, sorting your own photos, detecting use of your face in otherwise un-discoverable venues, plus basically about any kind of surveillance you can think of.
See, here's the thing. If they have your face, and they're hunting for a match, that's pretty bad already in terms of your privacy, but it requires that they already have your face and a specific existing concern, so therefore a reason to go looking for you.
But a sufficiently powerful system that can identify you generally -- see your face, associate your identity -- can track you (along with everyone else) when they're not looking for you. The implications for privacy and government misbehavior are extremely negative.
Underlying this is that our system of law is riddled with bad law, for bad reasons, with bad consequences. Copyright, drug use, sexuality, all serve as good examples of issues that the government sees one way, and significant numbers of citizens see somewhat differently. When your private, consensual behavior is unobserved, this causes far less (although certainly not zero) problems. When you are observed all the time... I think we can look for serious negative social impacts.
And for many tasks, you don't need any of that. Have a look at SQLite3 (also, it's built into Python, which can be handy.)
Worried about stability? You can compile the SQLite3 source code right into your project. That way, your databases always match your shipping product, indefinitely, period.
It's not usable for everything -- only a decent subset of SQL is supported -- but you might be surprised at just how much is there, and working well.
Most electrics "refill" overnight, whil(e|st) you're sleeping. Does your ICE based car do that? No. CAN it do that? No.
Depending on the range used -- not the range it's capable of, but the range used -- the EV may never, ever have to be charged outside of the home, overnight. This is actually a very common scenario.
See, these are things you have to take into account: You can't reliably think of an EV the way you think of an ICV. Many of the "problems" people imagine are primarily the domain of the ICV, and apply either not at all, or differently, to an EV, in most common usage scenarios.
Now, me, I need range -- it's 290 miles to the nearest decent city in my state from where I live, and I have to go there more or less regularly (medical reasons... but they also have restaurants, music, shopping... so it's always worthy for me and my SO.) And then when I *get* there, I usually end up driving around quite a bit. So EV's, at least at the moment, are highly problematic for me. But I recognize that I am very much the exception.
I'd *still* like to have an EV for use locally -- then I'd be one of those "charge overnight" people, just taking the ICV out when a long trip is called for, or snow makes the EV unable to get around, with no possible way of using up the EV's range puttering around our little 1-mile across town, or even with a 20 mile (so 40 round trip) jaunt out to the lake, something we also do regularly in the summer months.
You have to account for the effect of the hysterical telling people their "lives are ruined" because X happened. That's the real driver for the vast majority of the sexual neurosis in the USA: backwards, puritanical pinheads who value harmful rhetoric over people's sense of self under any circumstance that has anything at all to do with sexuality, direct or indirect.
I predict you will have to remain stiff in the face of strong opposition; support is key, as it raises your points in the face of the electorate, and helps to project your main tips as to how your new political stance will affect us. I hope your platform will also incorporate a significant transparency component, so that instead of relying on Internet searches, we can directly view the issues at hand. With careful planning, I'm sure you can get at least the male portion of the electorate thinking of your campaign every few seconds without fail. And remember to keep it real, and keep it natural. While no one likes a sagging economy, propping up with what amounts to nothing more than plastic bags won't fool most voters. We can read a curve -- we know the real thing when we see it.
Missed that, sorry. Of course it is a terrible, terrible thing to jail or otherwise punish someone who is innocent. But jail does differ from the death penalty in one critical way: You can let them back out. You can't revive a dead person. That's game over.
Having said that, yes, when tech gets that far, assuming it does, we should never again jail or even accuse an innocent. It's absolutely horrible that we do. If we can ask "did you do it?" and get back a reality-based "no", then all that citizen need do is go on with their life. No arrest, no record, no nothing.
From the POV of the prisoner, prison is exile. For most, it is even permanent -- because when they get out, society no longer offers them the ability to move on with their lives on anything even remotely resembling that of other citizens. Instead, they are relegated to a permanent lower class, with records that prevent employment, destroy credit, affect passports, 2nd amendment rights, IIRC voting rights in some places, even where and how they can live. IMHO, this is because Americans are perfectly comfortable with unending retribution and thrive on useless, vicious gossip.
Still, it might be interesting to see a large urban area, otherwise close to useless, as in "Escape from New York" be turned into a "drop 'em off and forget about 'em" walled exile region. Fly in food and airdrop it. Otherwise, survival of the fittest, etc. Or even one of the least populated states -- Wyoming comes to mind -- but this is like the death penalty, because it is extremely harsh, and would be damned difficult to "undo." So for that, again, I'd just as soon we wait until we can assure actual guilt, as opposed to "we say you're guilty."
It certainly is if the person is innocent, because it allows them at least some chance to achieve relief, perhaps even redress, for the wrong society has done them.
As for the guilty, doesn't worry me a bit. As long as they don't get out, society has been equally improved.
This is like trying to say that because some people die in traffic accidents, it's ok if your kid drowned in the neighbor's pool with no fence. The one has NOTHING to do with the other.
dupe: parent forgot to log in
It certainly is if the person is innocent, because it allows them at least some chance to achieve relief, perhaps even redress, for the wrong society has done them.
As for the guilty, doesn't worry me a bit. As long as they don't get out, society has been equally improved.
This is like trying to say that because some people die in traffic accidents, it's ok if your kid drowned in the neighbor's pool with no fence. The one has NOTHING to do with the other.
I'm with you -- certain heinous crimes deserve the death penalty. However:
In many cases, we cannot be certain that the individual who has been judged guilty, actually is. We know from the various exoneration projects, where convicted death row inmates have been proven innocent with more advanced forensic techniques (DNA, etc.) that the system regularly makes horrific errors, sentencing the innocent to death. Even just a cursory understanding of how our justice system works will make any reasonable person aware that it is error-prone. And we must not put people who are not actually guilty to death. Ever.
Consequently, this is my position: Until or unless technology allows us to unequivocally, zero-possible-doubt, 100% certain determine actual guilt of the actual crime they are being tried for, we cannot afford to engage in killing as punishment without becoming the very worst kind of criminals ourselves.
So as things stand right now, I am solidly against any use of the death penalty.
I'm just going to go ahead and call you a raging optimist. :)
"But... but... isn't there a library for that?"
lol
Decline? It's been like that for decades now. That, and a means for otherwise arbitrary classing:
Job: Keeping 20 or so PCs running.
Requirement: 2-year degree
Reason: [crickets]
etc.
You will know almost nothing important about the field when you leave college. If you manage to work for about five-ten years actually doing engineering -- as opposed to being mired in meetings, committees, half-finished projects, retreats, and seminars -- you'll probably pick up enough to actually feel like you own that degree. Related, you run into an engineer who has real chops right out of college, and you'll realize that what you have is no more than a ghostly, incomplete outline of the real tasks you face.
When you leave college, prepare to do a *lot* more bookwork, ask a lot of questions, figure out the ebb and flow of things like (for an EE) parts availability and longevity and market cycle, FCC and UL certifications, how to actually work with mechanical engineers, manage all manner of varied computer toolchains -- pcb layout, device programming, cpu programming, source code repositories, BOM managment, project planning tools, and so on... and math. You're going to have to get very, very comfortable with at least a moderate level of math. Any cribbing and cramming done in college will have to be replaced with a concerted effort to actually wrap your head around the subject.
And then we get into the many, many specialized areas that will affect just what you need to learn. RF? Microwave (not the same as RF, trust me on this)? uP system design? Signal processing? Embedded systems? Automotive, aircraft, military, space systems? Batteries? High power systems like transmission lines? Neural designs? Medical, with its myriad sub-sub specialties, some of which are more art than science? Networking? Household? Process control? AI? Robotics? Toys and Games? Probability? Test instruments? Antenna systems (it's like RF but with with a dose of magic and a dose of art and a dose of luck and the constant interference / interaction of everything with what you're trying to accomplish)? CNC? Will you need to learn about hardening? Sonar? Radar? Beam weaponry? EMP? I guarantee you'll learn quite a bit about ESD, probably first hand if you work in a dry region...
Oh, and the reality of commercial drives and deadlines, those usually come as quite the nasty shock, too. You haven't lived until the words "ship it!" send a nasty shiver down your spine because you know more testing / characterization / documentation / special casing / something else is called for.
As my boss at Can-American Electronics back in the day told a prospective hire when he announced he had a PhD: "Well, I won't hold that against you."
Science isn't even that. Science is a method. What you put in is behavior that hopefully complies with the method, and what you get out is data, broken into empirical and behavioral observations, to which we can apply some measure of confidence. The method -- science -- is quite solid. It's the rest that is error prone. All of it. In fact, as soon as "belief" replaces carefully restrained confidence, you're already screwing up.
Judging by the content of your post, the only thing the "negroid race" has to fear is slipping down to your level of intelligence.
Seems unlikely, though.
Wow. Thanks for proving my point so well.
I'd be delighted to do so. And I am hardly alone in this.
Well, ok. But I think your definition of "family" in the context of overpopulation needs some broadening. Marriage and so forth is not now, nor has ever been, a universal social constant.