Stephen Hawking is taking the survival of the species slant to preserve human space exploration. Let's look at it another way. Who gets to go? Only the wealthy? The 'geniuses'? The 'artists'? Random sampling?
Human beings are arrogant enough to think that the universe couldn't go on without them...
Actually I hope it's really soon. I not against jail breaking, but I don't like the idea that PDFs can be used to exploit iOS4.
http://secunia.com/advisories/40807/
H1B visas get a bad reputation because Microsoft and Intel lobby congress to increase the yearly quotas on the premise that there aren't enough skill US workers to fill the positions. As part of their lobbying (aka bullying) they threaten to relocate outside the US unless they get what they want like an increase in the quota and exemption from the H1B fee hikes.
Giving companies a free pass on the H1B application is violating everyone else's right to equal protection (ie 14th amendment). I know when I was in the forest products industry, my clients had to pay the same plant quarantine application fee as everyone else regardless of the size of the business.
H1B visas are necessary. They allow foreign scientists and other skilled labor to work along side US workers in most University settings. Like anything else, they can be subject to abuse.
If indeed, Microsoft and Intel are following the rules, they must pay AT LEAST the average wage in the local area, so they're not going to save all that much.
You left out the part where Microsoft and Intel are keeping the local average wage low by using H-1Bs.
Also, what determines the local average wage and how often are the companies audited for compliance? I think you'll be disappointed by the answer.
However, one could argue that the companies can get top rung foreigners for average US worker prices, thus are really underpaying the foreigners.
Why ignore the top rung US workers or were you implying that US workers can't be top rung?
The Ubuntu fanboys enjoy ripping on Red Hat for not contributing to the desktop, and for being a boring company focusing only on the serverside of things.
I thought it was because Canonical offered both a desktop and server edition of their distribution for free with long term support (LTS) editions of both. Red Hat, on the other hand, chose to only offer their enterprise level distribution on a subscription basis, and continues to offer a free linux distribution secondhand through Fedora which up to recently were considered too bleeding edge whose support were short lived after the next edition came out.
People are also claiming that Red Hat doesn't care about the desktop, which this proves is also pure crap.
Really? I thought it was because RedHat didn't care about Linux at home.
Some loyal RedHat users felt betrayed when RedHat went to a subscription model after RedHat 9. I know I did. Suddenly home users were second class citizens and was left with a "bleeding edge" distribution called Fedora. Because of the lack of broadband and the desire to support the cause, I purchased all of my RedHat CDs straight from RedHat. When RedHat decided to concentrate on enterprise computing, I felt that they didn't need my money anymore and went to another distribution.
Not the kernel, not GNOME, no where are they contributing a significant amount of patches. And all the apologists are busy trying to justify that the most downloaded distribution on distrowatch is not giving back anything significant. Even the fluendo guys are contributing more than Ubuntu.
So? Redhat knew what they were getting into when they based their business on a GPL licensed OS.
What about targeting home users? Advocacy? Documentation? Making all their editions available for download with no subscription required for automatic updates? Welcoming people who may not be fluent in computer science. Nope not RedHat - it was Canonical.
This costs money and Canonical spent it. This is what they contributed to Linux, and is why they have a larger share of the home market.
his acceptance of "oh well, that's how it's going, that's what we'll do".
Acceptance? He makes money from actually doing this. Wake up!
He's probably right in that every government will want online identity, of course they would. But it's up to us to battle for "what is right" and we always hoped Google would help us. If he just rolls over and accepts it, that's terrible for us.
He sells it, why would he wan't to hurt his own revenue stream?
Wow how many people actually believed the "do no evil" bs?
There are usually a couple of vendors selling surplus oscilloscopes for very little money. As always know what your looking for and ask around to see how reputable a vendor is. Most I've seen are regulars (attended the same hamfest every year), but I've seen some new guys with questionable quality gear that get really defensive if you ask them to turn it on. Walk away from these guys.
I purchased a nice 35Mhz analog scope about 5 years ago for only $50. You may not have the same luck, but it's worth a look.
From what I hear Blackberry does what it's designed to do very well and very securely. RIM also seem to make reliable phone with the exception of the original Storm.
My android phone doesn't even come close to handling work email as well as the Blackberry.
There is nothing wrong with picking the best phone that meets your purpose. Android is okay. The support isn't there, and it sure isn't as integrated as the Blackberry with enterprise email.
Don't get me wrong. I think competition is good. It's just that we are comparing the sales of a single maker of phone on a single US phone network to a group of phone manufactures on all US phone networks.
The numbers are indicating ease of purchasing rather than one is better than the other.
I think the survey shows that Apple needs to free itself from an exclusive contract with ATT. I have an Android phone, but I would replace it with an iPhone as soon as it becomes available on T-Mobile.
Well... let me rephrase that. In this case, the view of the scientists who are writing the book is supported by both my own experience and another third-party study I've seen. The view of the random guy on the internet isn't supported by anything numbers I've ever seen.
Well the college where I'm from is in the SEC and my experience and those around me are different. Hence, the skepticism.
Which gives us a grand total (excluding Vandy) $339,030,818 with none from state or student dollars.
If you look at the expense sheet for each university, you'd find that some money goes to student aid (scholarships) which is used by the academic department. I'll let you look at each university, but I'll show Auburn's numbers for an example:
Auburn University's Athletic department took in $50,923,068 which include $982,349 in student fees for non-specific sport programs and $0 government support. They spent $6,124,949 in student aid, and thanks to Title IX (Women's sports) and other sports only had a profit of $121,815.
Like all things, there are winners and losers. If the university is not making any money in their conference, then it is up to them to opt out.
I don't know who's right here, but I'd be inclined to trust the researchers writing a book.
I'm not. I work with scientists and they report what they believe is accurate and correct. I will then bump into another set of scientists who don't agree.
When it comes to political or social research I take a very skeptical look at their work, since most of the reports I've seen have been biased one way or another (politics does that). Writing a book only means they used a lot of paper to be wrong.
I'm a member of a college athletics committee, and I can tell you with all confidence that while is the common perception of college and university football programs, it simply isn't true. Even in Division I institutions football teams are, as a rule, largely funded by state dollars, student fees, and creative tax exemptions rather than by ticket sales, television contracts, etc. And this has been shown in study after study -- it's even a line that the NCAA toes.
I don't agree. There are winners and losers in all fields, and you assertion that Division I football teams are as a rule funded by state dollars and student fees are unfounded. Using the link you provided, I looked up my alma mater, and some other colleges in its conference:
(Football only)
Auburn University, total revenue $40,563,927 of which is $0 State Dollars and $0 Student Fees.
University of Alabama, total revenue $42,979,669 of which $0 State Dollars and $0 Student Fees
University of Georgia, total revenue $50,895,838 of which $0 State Dollars and $0 Student Fees
University of Florida, total revenue $43,417,641 of which $0 State Dollars and $0 Student Fees
University of Kentucky, total revenue $19,973,591 of which $0 State Dollars and $0 Student Fees
Louisiana State University, total revenue $40,107,764 of which $0 State Dollars and $0 Student Fees
Mississippi State University, total revenue $9,792,405 of which $0 State Dollars and $0 Student Fees
University of Mississippi, total revenue $15,958,445 of which $0 State Dollars and $0 Student Fees
University of Tennessee, total revenue $29,326,709 of which $0 State Dollars and $0 Student Fees
Vanderbilt University is not included in that report you linked.
University of Arkansas, total revenue $28,562,866 of which $0 State Dollars and $0 Student Fees
University of South Carolina, total revenue $17,451,963 of which $0 State Dollars and $0 Student Fees
Which gives us a grand total (excluding Vandy) $339,030,818 with none from state or student dollars.
If you look at the expense sheet for each university, you'd find that some money goes to student aid (scholarships) which is used by the academic department. I'll let you look at each university, but I'll show Auburn's numbers for an example:
Auburn University's Athletic department took in $50,923,068 which include $982,349 in student fees for non-specific sport programs and $0 government support. They spent $6,124,949 in student aid, and thanks to Title IX (Women's sports) and other sports only had a profit of $121,815.
Looking at the report shows how much political correctness cost. Title IX (Women's) sports sucks up the athletic department's budget. I'm not saying that anything is wrong with women sports, except that they spend more money than they earn. Which may account for the reason some other conferences may need help funding athletics since Title IX sports is a federal mandate.
It's time for the myth that College Athletics being a burden on the university system to die. I didn't even mention the amount of money each academic department makes in Alumni donations during homecoming and fund raising events involving sports.
Only Python comes close to having anything resembling Perl's level of testing.
If only Python would abandon the code blocking through indentation and add something similar to Perl's "use strict".
Sure people will expound on the benefits of forced indentation, but I'm old enough to have lived through Fortran 77 and I thought we've moved past positional requirements of source code.
I can live with the indentation, but I would really really like the "use strict" functionality. This way Python doesn't assume that my typo was meant to be a new variable.
I use Perl extensively and I agree with most of your post. However I have a love/hate relationship with CPAN. I prefer Ruby's GEM. Sure CPAN is very comprehensive, but actually using CPAN to install the modules can put you in a whole world of hurt. Why is there no easy way to uninstall the modules? I know people who would rather have an older version of a module and use RPM than to put up with the nonsense that is CPAN.
BTW, I must be blessed because I haven't had any versioning issues with GEM... yet.
Luckily for me my CPAN-fu is strong, and I can pretty much tame the temperamental beast. However, I keep wondering why I need to? It's like the only requirement for CPAN was to have a central repository that makes it easier to install library modules, and the modules are so fantastic we won't ever need to uninstall them. Sure you can manually remove a module from the lib directories, just cross your fingers about breaking some dependencies.
I know I'll probably ruffle some feathers, but I think of Ruby as Perl's little sister with better OO.
Personally I think arguing over global climate change is a red herring. Do we really need an excuse to advocate "green" technologies?
Shouldn't the fact that we would have cleaner air (eg. less smog), and cleaner water (eg. less spills) be enough?
The fact that industry is willing to pollute the air, water, and land to save a buck and use the threat of job losses to keep the populace from demanding stricter environmental regulations should be a huge clue on why we are even having this global climate change debate. It keeps us busy, and as long as we are busy trying to define what global climate change is, we are distracted from the real meat of the argument which is why are we living in this pollution now?
I'm not a registered tree hugger, but even I question why our energy and environmental policies hasn't evolved with the rest of our technological achievements. It becomes more evident by the day that we are keeping a very old and harmful power, industrial, and transportation system just to keep the current revenue generators fat and happy.
Slashdot Mirror
Stephen Hawking is taking the survival of the species slant to preserve human space exploration. Let's look at it another way. Who gets to go? Only the wealthy? The 'geniuses'? The 'artists'? Random sampling?
Human beings are arrogant enough to think that the universe couldn't go on without them...
Actually I hope it's really soon. I not against jail breaking, but I don't like the idea that PDFs can be used to exploit iOS4. http://secunia.com/advisories/40807/
H1B visas get a bad reputation because Microsoft and Intel lobby congress to increase the yearly quotas on the premise that there aren't enough skill US workers to fill the positions. As part of their lobbying (aka bullying) they threaten to relocate outside the US unless they get what they want like an increase in the quota and exemption from the H1B fee hikes.
Giving companies a free pass on the H1B application is violating everyone else's right to equal protection (ie 14th amendment). I know when I was in the forest products industry, my clients had to pay the same plant quarantine application fee as everyone else regardless of the size of the business.
H1B visas are necessary. They allow foreign scientists and other skilled labor to work along side US workers in most University settings. Like anything else, they can be subject to abuse.
You left out the part where Microsoft and Intel are keeping the local average wage low by using H-1Bs.
Also, what determines the local average wage and how often are the companies audited for compliance? I think you'll be disappointed by the answer.
Why ignore the top rung US workers or were you implying that US workers can't be top rung?
I thought it was because Canonical offered both a desktop and server edition of their distribution for free with long term support (LTS) editions of both. Red Hat, on the other hand, chose to only offer their enterprise level distribution on a subscription basis, and continues to offer a free linux distribution secondhand through Fedora which up to recently were considered too bleeding edge whose support were short lived after the next edition came out.
Really? I thought it was because RedHat didn't care about Linux at home.
Some loyal RedHat users felt betrayed when RedHat went to a subscription model after RedHat 9. I know I did. Suddenly home users were second class citizens and was left with a "bleeding edge" distribution called Fedora. Because of the lack of broadband and the desire to support the cause, I purchased all of my RedHat CDs straight from RedHat. When RedHat decided to concentrate on enterprise computing, I felt that they didn't need my money anymore and went to another distribution.
So? Redhat knew what they were getting into when they based their business on a GPL licensed OS.
What about targeting home users? Advocacy? Documentation? Making all their editions available for download with no subscription required for automatic updates? Welcoming people who may not be fluent in computer science. Nope not RedHat - it was Canonical.
This costs money and Canonical spent it. This is what they contributed to Linux, and is why they have a larger share of the home market.
Stupid typo... s/wan't/want/
Acceptance? He makes money from actually doing this. Wake up!
He sells it, why would he wan't to hurt his own revenue stream?
Wow how many people actually believed the "do no evil" bs?
There are usually a couple of vendors selling surplus oscilloscopes for very little money. As always know what your looking for and ask around to see how reputable a vendor is. Most I've seen are regulars (attended the same hamfest every year), but I've seen some new guys with questionable quality gear that get really defensive if you ask them to turn it on. Walk away from these guys.
I purchased a nice 35Mhz analog scope about 5 years ago for only $50. You may not have the same luck, but it's worth a look.
What? I can't hear you from all the noise.
Why?
From what I hear Blackberry does what it's designed to do very well and very securely. RIM also seem to make reliable phone with the exception of the original Storm.
My android phone doesn't even come close to handling work email as well as the Blackberry.
There is nothing wrong with picking the best phone that meets your purpose. Android is okay. The support isn't there, and it sure isn't as integrated as the Blackberry with enterprise email.
Well too many puns are known to have high inductance for vomiting...
Don't get me wrong. I think competition is good. It's just that we are comparing the sales of a single maker of phone on a single US phone network to a group of phone manufactures on all US phone networks.
The numbers are indicating ease of purchasing rather than one is better than the other.
I think we need to transform this conversation into something else.
Great you just used rule 34 to bring that site into existence.
I think the survey shows that Apple needs to free itself from an exclusive contract with ATT. I have an Android phone, but I would replace it with an iPhone as soon as it becomes available on T-Mobile.
It is corporate welfare. We're forced to purchase insurance and have no public option.
It's a shitty plan regardless of which party you make your allegiance too.
I guess you're not in the US, because jailbreak or not, you need ATT to use 3G. Thank you FCC.
More like just in time for the November elections...
Well the college where I'm from is in the SEC and my experience and those around me are different. Hence, the skepticism.
Here are the numbers from my other post:
Like all things, there are winners and losers. If the university is not making any money in their conference, then it is up to them to opt out.
I'm not. I work with scientists and they report what they believe is accurate and correct. I will then bump into another set of scientists who don't agree.
When it comes to political or social research I take a very skeptical look at their work, since most of the reports I've seen have been biased one way or another (politics does that). Writing a book only means they used a lot of paper to be wrong.
I don't agree. There are winners and losers in all fields, and you assertion that Division I football teams are as a rule funded by state dollars and student fees are unfounded. Using the link you provided, I looked up my alma mater, and some other colleges in its conference:
(Football only)
Which gives us a grand total (excluding Vandy) $339,030,818 with none from state or student dollars.
If you look at the expense sheet for each university, you'd find that some money goes to student aid (scholarships) which is used by the academic department. I'll let you look at each university, but I'll show Auburn's numbers for an example:
Auburn University's Athletic department took in $50,923,068 which include $982,349 in student fees for non-specific sport programs and $0 government support. They spent $6,124,949 in student aid, and thanks to Title IX (Women's sports) and other sports only had a profit of $121,815.
Looking at the report shows how much political correctness cost. Title IX (Women's) sports sucks up the athletic department's budget. I'm not saying that anything is wrong with women sports, except that they spend more money than they earn. Which may account for the reason some other conferences may need help funding athletics since Title IX sports is a federal mandate.
It's time for the myth that College Athletics being a burden on the university system to die. I didn't even mention the amount of money each academic department makes in Alumni donations during homecoming and fund raising events involving sports.
So working for Walmart equates to Suicide/euthanasia? Interesting...
That would explain why they act like the walking dead.
If only Python would abandon the code blocking through indentation and add something similar to Perl's "use strict".
Sure people will expound on the benefits of forced indentation, but I'm old enough to have lived through Fortran 77 and I thought we've moved past positional requirements of source code.
I can live with the indentation, but I would really really like the "use strict" functionality. This way Python doesn't assume that my typo was meant to be a new variable.
Yes these are personally preferences...
I use Perl extensively and I agree with most of your post. However I have a love/hate relationship with CPAN. I prefer Ruby's GEM. Sure CPAN is very comprehensive, but actually using CPAN to install the modules can put you in a whole world of hurt. Why is there no easy way to uninstall the modules? I know people who would rather have an older version of a module and use RPM than to put up with the nonsense that is CPAN.
BTW, I must be blessed because I haven't had any versioning issues with GEM... yet.
Luckily for me my CPAN-fu is strong, and I can pretty much tame the temperamental beast. However, I keep wondering why I need to? It's like the only requirement for CPAN was to have a central repository that makes it easier to install library modules, and the modules are so fantastic we won't ever need to uninstall them. Sure you can manually remove a module from the lib directories, just cross your fingers about breaking some dependencies.
I know I'll probably ruffle some feathers, but I think of Ruby as Perl's little sister with better OO.
Personally I think arguing over global climate change is a red herring. Do we really need an excuse to advocate "green" technologies?
Shouldn't the fact that we would have cleaner air (eg. less smog), and cleaner water (eg. less spills) be enough?
The fact that industry is willing to pollute the air, water, and land to save a buck and use the threat of job losses to keep the populace from demanding stricter environmental regulations should be a huge clue on why we are even having this global climate change debate. It keeps us busy, and as long as we are busy trying to define what global climate change is, we are distracted from the real meat of the argument which is why are we living in this pollution now?
I'm not a registered tree hugger, but even I question why our energy and environmental policies hasn't evolved with the rest of our technological achievements. It becomes more evident by the day that we are keeping a very old and harmful power, industrial, and transportation system just to keep the current revenue generators fat and happy.