I agree with everything you said about parenting in the post. In fact, its one of the few truly insightful posts I've read on slashdot.
I'd just like to say a couple of things about the last part, on being spoiled/sheltered. What you said can be true, but isn't the only application. I came from a middle class family from the suburbs. After high school, I went to college, and definitely met some spoiled and sheltered kids (although very few that were BOTH, as its hard to really be spoiled and sheltered at the same time). Things like parents buying their kids new BMW's while they're busy failing out during freshman year. I guess my definition of spoiled is more "unmerited reward" or, as it applies to most of what you wrote, parents who just aren't paying attention to what their kids are doing.
What I'm saying is that if parents don't moderate their kids as you pointed out, they'll have a good chance of turning out like the people I just described. That, to me, is embarassing.
Are you able to capture all HD programming via firewire, or is just the OTA coming through? AFAIK, all they're required to provide unencrypted is the stuff that would come OTA.
You could see a flash drive in ~20 gig form for the OS and apps, with a conventional HD in there just for file storage. I mean, with some intelligent use and the right controller behind the HD, it could be kept powered down 90% of the time. I say intelligent use because an idiot user could easily negate all of this by installing their apps to the HD instead of the flash drive.
Why make such a blanket statement on Christians? I'm Catholic and I'd vote for a woman in either party if her issues were in line with mine (and I'm not talking social issues, I'm talking fiscal). Give me a good plan to cut back spending and you'd have my vote, whether your name is Hillary Clinton or Condoleezza (sp?) Rice. Problem is, Republicans and Democrats are identical on the fiscal side, differing only on social issues that won't matter if we debt-spend our economy into oblivion.
I've long thought we must have too much time on our hands if social issues push to center stage over economic issues, because the former are irrelevant if the latter falls apart. You basically have the right to pursue any peaceful activity you'd like right now, so let's worry about the economy. If you're a democrat and you're willing to do that, I'd vote for you, even though I'm registered as a republican.
Re:Private and public are not mutually exclusive
on
Open Source Molecules
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
For one, if my tax dollars are funding the research, why shouldn't I have open access to the findings? If private companies want to keep this stuff private, let them do it without tax-based assistance. They're free to charge for their findings, but the gov't shouldn't suppress the free dissemination of data from tax-funded research just because somebody else was previously making a buck on it. The private company will have to find a way to add value such to justify the cost of their service. That's how markets work, in case the ACS didn't know. Trying to have the courts suppress your competition isn't how free markets work.
That's very true, but not entirely. PhD programs will accept you provisionally, and you'll be required to take some upper level math as remedial coursework during the first year.
The better undergraduate economics programs are now requiring what amounts to a math minor for this exact reason. You just won't cut it in graduate economics without math skills, because upper level theory is mathematically rigorous. My program offered grad-level theory to seniors to better prepare them for graduate work. Like I said, though, we're a top 20 program as of when I graduated (and currently still), so I'm sure its easy to find examples of schools that DON'T do this.
Any major can be turned useless given the right (wrong?) department faculty and leadership.
I didn't take offense to it, I did just want knock in my two cents to move economics out of a perceived cellar:)
My school offered 3 Econ degrees, a BA, BS, and BBA. The BA required more "social science" type classes, the BS more upper level theory, math, and research, while the BBA required the business core that all business majors took (intro level accounting, finance, etc, plus a single 12 credit course that integrated all of 'em) and then your upper level theory requirements that the BS had, plus the general business capstone.
I personally did the BBA because I thought it would help to have the business skills on my resume when it came time to look for a job. I have friends who got the BS who are also all employed, but I would say those of us that did the BBA got better jobs, probably because we had the general business skills and were perceived as better rounded candidates.
My actual point was that even hard science majors ought to maybe stay an extra year and minor in a business field. For instance, a guy with a BS in Mathematics who minored in business could make a whole lot of money as an Actuary. I personally benefitted from my econometrics skills in the business environment, no doubt more due to my stats coursework than my business coursework, but the little bit I knew about business put me ahead of others that didn't, I would imagine.
For what it's worth, I WAS a biology major for about two years. I learned quite a bit and liked it a lot, but I ended up switching because our faculty was overly apathetic. Otherwise I would've graduated with a BS in Biology, no doubt. I respect the hard sciences probably more than my own major, but I did notice that most of the on-campus recruitment was for the college of business grads (majors and minors).
Economics is lumped in with marketing and communications, you're telling me? I hope you're just misinformed, because while not as difficult as the "hard" sciences, it's a lot more involved than the cake majors like marketing or communications. I might be biased because I did come out of a top-20 economics dept, but there's quite a bit of mathematics required for that degree. In fact, to have any hope as a real life economist, you'd probably need as much or more math coursework than a biology major (3 levels of calculus plus a good amt of advanced statistics). Marketing and communications don't need any of that. (That's probably why in my graduating class, the College of Business had 55 econ majors, our largest ever, vs 600-some marketing and another 600 management majors).
I would push Economics to any freshman who wants to acquire some practical business skills while keeping one foot in the abstract level. Employers today want well-rounded (read: technical knowledge with practical business knowledge), which neither the hard sciences (bio, phys, math, etc) or the cake majors (marketing, management, communications) will teach. It's the middle ground, like Economics, Mgmt IS, Actuarial Science, etc that seem to be popular among college employment recruiters these days.
If you believe workers are a commodity, you're probably not a manager, or if you are, probably not a very good one. Sorry if this is in any way insulting, but you need to hear it.
Good managers find the people who AREN'T commodity employees. Otherwise you might as well hire the first guy through the door, or not even have recruiters in your HR department. The hiring process is meant to determine which candidate adds the most value to the organization. That's an indisputable fact.
Just out of college or not, some of us are the types you want in the organization because nothing leaves our hands until it's right. You shouldn't talk down to someone because they've admitted to themselves that they ARE highly skilled/talented, as long as they can back it up. Actually, I doubt I'd even have the position I have now if it weren't for that sort of attitude. In an interview, I make sure to bring that point across, and without sounding arrogant (confidence isn't arrogance). Having gotten offers coming out of school within two weeks of starting the job search, and again when I decided to move on from the first job, I can say that the attitude is the correct one. Believe me, I'm not taking low pay to work anywhere that'll take me, either. It's nice to be able to leverage multiple offers, and if I were a commodity-type employee, I doubt that'd be the case. Or at least, I doubt any employer would be aggressive in pursuing me (and rightfully so).
If you're not yet in management but want to be, at least in a larger organization, this is something you'll have to realize. I don't mean this as a flame, I believe it to be purely constructive. If you do happen to be a manager in a large organization, all I'll ask is how you became jaded? Because I'm sure this wasn't your attitude from the start.
People who rent or buy expensive stuff just to create a "grown up" image are stupid and immature in my opinion.
You couldn't have said that better.
I moved to the Washington, DC area a couple of months ago and that's pretty much all I see. People here are buying up houses they cant afford via interest-only ARM's (1/3 of all housing sold in the DC market last year was on an I-O ARM!), leasing cars they couldn't afford the payment to buy (think: a lot of new college grad, young professionals leasing BMW 3-series). I mean, do I have my excesses? Yeah, I lease an overpriced apartment to live closer to the metro and nightlife, but I've mitigated that by getting a 3rd roommate willing to live in a room that isn't quite a bedroom (my roommates both being my best friends from college). I also tend to eat out and spend more time at the bar than I should, but that's to have a good time, and definitely not to tell other people "look how grown up i am." In the end, I still manage to save quite a bit every month, to the point where I'll at least be able to afford a sizeable down payment on a home by the time I'm 30 (whether or not I'll want one will depend on the market conditions). Even if I'm patting myself on the back here, that's the definition of maturity, the opposite of living beyond your means. I completely agree with you when you say you want to hold onto your money until it can be better spent. There'll inevitably be those who spend more than they produce and those who don't. It's far easier to live well if you pin down the financial aspect by becoming the latter. It means just one less thing to worry about, even if you're not the envy of your friends at 25 because you bought a home (which you probably can't afford in any major metro area).
I just left home to take this job (first one out of college was really close, so I chose to save for a bit and not move out). Cost of living is astronomical down here, and at present, the rent gap is still high, so I couldn't imagine buying a home just yet. Plus, living closer to "everything" (public transportation, places to go, things to do) generally means living in an area where they're building upwards, not outwards, meaning no houses nearby. If I want to remain in the area I'm in now, there's no houses to speak of.
That's by design. You always pay a hefty price for the top notch CPU, video card, etc, whether or not it costs nearly that much to produce it. The simple reality of it is that a good size market exists for the top notch PC sold at the top notch price. While prices are stable on that end of the market, they're dropping on the lower end, and generally have been.
I'm thinking that they may not even care how you did on the tests. All they wanted to see is how you handled pressure, and how nice it would be to work with you when you are under pressure. If you flip out, and make comments such as you did about some little test in an interview, imagine how you are going to react when there are real problems to solve, that have real pressure, because they could affect the entire company, and just your little interview.
"Hire the attitude, train the skill."
This is exactly what they were trying to find out about you, and you failed miserably. Soft skills count, even for engineers, developers, etc. (I am one, and I got my job based primarily on my attitude, secondarily on my technical skills). Remember, someone else can walk in and learn your skills. They'd rather have someone they'd like to work with above all.
Serious question here. Does production software exist to drive arbitrary computation across a GPU? I've seen articles about software on its way, etc. Does it exist, either as an application or integrated into some OS? Man, if I could push some of my statistical computing off to the GPU...
It's a "desktop cluster" because its compact. The word "desktop" is a good choice here, because what else would you call it and still be able to market it? "footprint of a desktop but too much power for mundane tasks" cluster? Don't take things so literally. At the end of the day, the people signing the purchase orders for these things are management, not low level IT staff, so you have to market accordingly. Also, Quebec isn't a country. It's a province in Canada. You may not like it, but that doesn't change the fact that it is, just like this product being a "desktop cluster"
I disagree. It has nothing to do with government support. The goverment pumps tons of money into the sciences by way of defense contracts. We spend a LOT of money on research and development.
The reason nobody's picking these majors and making a career out of it is that despite all the government spending, the jobs don't pay enough to make it worthwhile. I mean, if it takes 6-8 years to get your PhD in one of the hard sciences only to come out and make 60k a year, why not get a BBA and start at 50? In those 6 years, you'll be doing much better than the science PhD. (note, this is a general statement, does not apply to every case)
Oh, forgot to add, I'll qualify by saying I do earn my living as a SAS programmer and I really don't think these db architectures are in any dange of replacing me in the workforce. What I'm saying is, I agree with the other commenters, they fill a different role all together.
At first glance I was inclined to agree with you, mostly because it makes sense from a division of labor standpoint. However, have you ever worked with truly large dataasets in SAS? Even taking a random or stratified sample on which to base calculations takes forever. For that reason, approximated analytics in the db itself are likely necessary. It's not meant to replace your statisticians, where more rigorous analysis is necessary, but more to approximate answers where approximates are good enough, is the impression I'm getting.
The real question is, since most of this is tax dollar supported, why isn't more of it openly available to the public? I realize that releasing specs on nuclear warheads might pose a problem, but the code on say, the mars probes or some other innocuous project would probably be nice to see. And after all, we paid for it.
I'm not suggesting they'd take our changes and use them, I'm just saying a lot more non-sensitive code could be made public. NASA is, after all, suffering from a lack of public interest right now. Might as well get the disaffected nerds interested again. I know I'd love to have a look.
Well, look at it this way: If I were to hypothetically offer you $100, but you told me you were going to buy heroin with it, I might withhold that money from you.
The same goes for anything funded by taxpayers. If most of the folks paying taxes don't like what you're going to do with it, you're not entitled to spend their money. If a municipality decides to block anything because a large contingent of its taxpayers think it should be that way, then so be it. You're not entitled to spend other people's money on something that the majority objects. You'll always have the option of a privately funded service (ie, out of your own pocket, like paying for your own ISP without tax subsidy).
personally, i dont care if anyone's using the public network to look at porn for any moral reason. it probably will, however, reduce bandwidth costs.
Here in DC the doors shut fast and if you try to hold them, they don't open back up, they just stay at the point where you resisted enough to stop them. At this point a person definitely can't fit through. In fact, thats why our dwell times are relatively short. The doors close reasonably soon because usually another train is right behind.
I've just moved down here from NJ and I'm quite impressed with the DC Metrorail. It's clean because they enforce the "no food" policy too.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with everything you said about parenting in the post. In fact, its one of the few truly insightful posts I've read on slashdot.
I'd just like to say a couple of things about the last part, on being spoiled/sheltered. What you said can be true, but isn't the only application. I came from a middle class family from the suburbs. After high school, I went to college, and definitely met some spoiled and sheltered kids (although very few that were BOTH, as its hard to really be spoiled and sheltered at the same time). Things like parents buying their kids new BMW's while they're busy failing out during freshman year. I guess my definition of spoiled is more "unmerited reward" or, as it applies to most of what you wrote, parents who just aren't paying attention to what their kids are doing.
What I'm saying is that if parents don't moderate their kids as you pointed out, they'll have a good chance of turning out like the people I just described. That, to me, is embarassing.
Are you able to capture all HD programming via firewire, or is just the OTA coming through? AFAIK, all they're required to provide unencrypted is the stuff that would come OTA.
"One art, please."
You could see a flash drive in ~20 gig form for the OS and apps, with a conventional HD in there just for file storage. I mean, with some intelligent use and the right controller behind the HD, it could be kept powered down 90% of the time. I say intelligent use because an idiot user could easily negate all of this by installing their apps to the HD instead of the flash drive.
Why make such a blanket statement on Christians? I'm Catholic and I'd vote for a woman in either party if her issues were in line with mine (and I'm not talking social issues, I'm talking fiscal). Give me a good plan to cut back spending and you'd have my vote, whether your name is Hillary Clinton or Condoleezza (sp?) Rice. Problem is, Republicans and Democrats are identical on the fiscal side, differing only on social issues that won't matter if we debt-spend our economy into oblivion.
I've long thought we must have too much time on our hands if social issues push to center stage over economic issues, because the former are irrelevant if the latter falls apart. You basically have the right to pursue any peaceful activity you'd like right now, so let's worry about the economy. If you're a democrat and you're willing to do that, I'd vote for you, even though I'm registered as a republican.
For one, if my tax dollars are funding the research, why shouldn't I have open access to the findings? If private companies want to keep this stuff private, let them do it without tax-based assistance. They're free to charge for their findings, but the gov't shouldn't suppress the free dissemination of data from tax-funded research just because somebody else was previously making a buck on it. The private company will have to find a way to add value such to justify the cost of their service. That's how markets work, in case the ACS didn't know. Trying to have the courts suppress your competition isn't how free markets work.
That's very true, but not entirely. PhD programs will accept you provisionally, and you'll be required to take some upper level math as remedial coursework during the first year.
The better undergraduate economics programs are now requiring what amounts to a math minor for this exact reason. You just won't cut it in graduate economics without math skills, because upper level theory is mathematically rigorous. My program offered grad-level theory to seniors to better prepare them for graduate work. Like I said, though, we're a top 20 program as of when I graduated (and currently still), so I'm sure its easy to find examples of schools that DON'T do this.
Any major can be turned useless given the right (wrong?) department faculty and leadership.
I didn't take offense to it, I did just want knock in my two cents to move economics out of a perceived cellar :)
My school offered 3 Econ degrees, a BA, BS, and BBA. The BA required more "social science" type classes, the BS more upper level theory, math, and research, while the BBA required the business core that all business majors took (intro level accounting, finance, etc, plus a single 12 credit course that integrated all of 'em) and then your upper level theory requirements that the BS had, plus the general business capstone.
I personally did the BBA because I thought it would help to have the business skills on my resume when it came time to look for a job. I have friends who got the BS who are also all employed, but I would say those of us that did the BBA got better jobs, probably because we had the general business skills and were perceived as better rounded candidates.
My actual point was that even hard science majors ought to maybe stay an extra year and minor in a business field. For instance, a guy with a BS in Mathematics who minored in business could make a whole lot of money as an Actuary. I personally benefitted from my econometrics skills in the business environment, no doubt more due to my stats coursework than my business coursework, but the little bit I knew about business put me ahead of others that didn't, I would imagine.
For what it's worth, I WAS a biology major for about two years. I learned quite a bit and liked it a lot, but I ended up switching because our faculty was overly apathetic. Otherwise I would've graduated with a BS in Biology, no doubt. I respect the hard sciences probably more than my own major, but I did notice that most of the on-campus recruitment was for the college of business grads (majors and minors).
Economics is lumped in with marketing and communications, you're telling me? I hope you're just misinformed, because while not as difficult as the "hard" sciences, it's a lot more involved than the cake majors like marketing or communications. I might be biased because I did come out of a top-20 economics dept, but there's quite a bit of mathematics required for that degree. In fact, to have any hope as a real life economist, you'd probably need as much or more math coursework than a biology major (3 levels of calculus plus a good amt of advanced statistics). Marketing and communications don't need any of that. (That's probably why in my graduating class, the College of Business had 55 econ majors, our largest ever, vs 600-some marketing and another 600 management majors).
I would push Economics to any freshman who wants to acquire some practical business skills while keeping one foot in the abstract level. Employers today want well-rounded (read: technical knowledge with practical business knowledge), which neither the hard sciences (bio, phys, math, etc) or the cake majors (marketing, management, communications) will teach. It's the middle ground, like Economics, Mgmt IS, Actuarial Science, etc that seem to be popular among college employment recruiters these days.
If you believe workers are a commodity, you're probably not a manager, or if you are, probably not a very good one. Sorry if this is in any way insulting, but you need to hear it.
Good managers find the people who AREN'T commodity employees. Otherwise you might as well hire the first guy through the door, or not even have recruiters in your HR department. The hiring process is meant to determine which candidate adds the most value to the organization. That's an indisputable fact.
Just out of college or not, some of us are the types you want in the organization because nothing leaves our hands until it's right. You shouldn't talk down to someone because they've admitted to themselves that they ARE highly skilled/talented, as long as they can back it up. Actually, I doubt I'd even have the position I have now if it weren't for that sort of attitude. In an interview, I make sure to bring that point across, and without sounding arrogant (confidence isn't arrogance). Having gotten offers coming out of school within two weeks of starting the job search, and again when I decided to move on from the first job, I can say that the attitude is the correct one. Believe me, I'm not taking low pay to work anywhere that'll take me, either. It's nice to be able to leverage multiple offers, and if I were a commodity-type employee, I doubt that'd be the case. Or at least, I doubt any employer would be aggressive in pursuing me (and rightfully so).
If you're not yet in management but want to be, at least in a larger organization, this is something you'll have to realize. I don't mean this as a flame, I believe it to be purely constructive. If you do happen to be a manager in a large organization, all I'll ask is how you became jaded? Because I'm sure this wasn't your attitude from the start.
People who rent or buy expensive stuff just to create a "grown up" image are stupid and immature in my opinion.
You couldn't have said that better.
I moved to the Washington, DC area a couple of months ago and that's pretty much all I see. People here are buying up houses they cant afford via interest-only ARM's (1/3 of all housing sold in the DC market last year was on an I-O ARM!), leasing cars they couldn't afford the payment to buy (think: a lot of new college grad, young professionals leasing BMW 3-series). I mean, do I have my excesses? Yeah, I lease an overpriced apartment to live closer to the metro and nightlife, but I've mitigated that by getting a 3rd roommate willing to live in a room that isn't quite a bedroom (my roommates both being my best friends from college). I also tend to eat out and spend more time at the bar than I should, but that's to have a good time, and definitely not to tell other people "look how grown up i am." In the end, I still manage to save quite a bit every month, to the point where I'll at least be able to afford a sizeable down payment on a home by the time I'm 30 (whether or not I'll want one will depend on the market conditions). Even if I'm patting myself on the back here, that's the definition of maturity, the opposite of living beyond your means. I completely agree with you when you say you want to hold onto your money until it can be better spent. There'll inevitably be those who spend more than they produce and those who don't. It's far easier to live well if you pin down the financial aspect by becoming the latter. It means just one less thing to worry about, even if you're not the envy of your friends at 25 because you bought a home (which you probably can't afford in any major metro area).
Ha, are you in the DC area too?
I just left home to take this job (first one out of college was really close, so I chose to save for a bit and not move out). Cost of living is astronomical down here, and at present, the rent gap is still high, so I couldn't imagine buying a home just yet. Plus, living closer to "everything" (public transportation, places to go, things to do) generally means living in an area where they're building upwards, not outwards, meaning no houses nearby. If I want to remain in the area I'm in now, there's no houses to speak of.
That's by design. You always pay a hefty price for the top notch CPU, video card, etc, whether or not it costs nearly that much to produce it. The simple reality of it is that a good size market exists for the top notch PC sold at the top notch price. While prices are stable on that end of the market, they're dropping on the lower end, and generally have been.
I'm thinking that they may not even care how you did on the tests. All they wanted to see is how you handled pressure, and how nice it would be to work with you when you are under pressure. If you flip out, and make comments such as you did about some little test in an interview, imagine how you are going to react when there are real problems to solve, that have real pressure, because they could affect the entire company, and just your little interview.
"Hire the attitude, train the skill."
This is exactly what they were trying to find out about you, and you failed miserably. Soft skills count, even for engineers, developers, etc. (I am one, and I got my job based primarily on my attitude, secondarily on my technical skills). Remember, someone else can walk in and learn your skills. They'd rather have someone they'd like to work with above all.
Can someone post the article text? For some reason, BBC News is blocked at work.
TV executives discover elusive Higgs boson!
Thanks for the only genuine laugh I got out of this thread!
Serious question here. Does production software exist to drive arbitrary computation across a GPU? I've seen articles about software on its way, etc. Does it exist, either as an application or integrated into some OS? Man, if I could push some of my statistical computing off to the GPU...
It's a "desktop cluster" because its compact. The word "desktop" is a good choice here, because what else would you call it and still be able to market it? "footprint of a desktop but too much power for mundane tasks" cluster? Don't take things so literally. At the end of the day, the people signing the purchase orders for these things are management, not low level IT staff, so you have to market accordingly. Also, Quebec isn't a country. It's a province in Canada. You may not like it, but that doesn't change the fact that it is, just like this product being a "desktop cluster"
I disagree. It has nothing to do with government support. The goverment pumps tons of money into the sciences by way of defense contracts. We spend a LOT of money on research and development.
The reason nobody's picking these majors and making a career out of it is that despite all the government spending, the jobs don't pay enough to make it worthwhile. I mean, if it takes 6-8 years to get your PhD in one of the hard sciences only to come out and make 60k a year, why not get a BBA and start at 50? In those 6 years, you'll be doing much better than the science PhD. (note, this is a general statement, does not apply to every case)
Oh, forgot to add, I'll qualify by saying I do earn my living as a SAS programmer and I really don't think these db architectures are in any dange of replacing me in the workforce. What I'm saying is, I agree with the other commenters, they fill a different role all together.
At first glance I was inclined to agree with you, mostly because it makes sense from a division of labor standpoint. However, have you ever worked with truly large dataasets in SAS? Even taking a random or stratified sample on which to base calculations takes forever. For that reason, approximated analytics in the db itself are likely necessary. It's not meant to replace your statisticians, where more rigorous analysis is necessary, but more to approximate answers where approximates are good enough, is the impression I'm getting.
The real question is, since most of this is tax dollar supported, why isn't more of it openly available to the public? I realize that releasing specs on nuclear warheads might pose a problem, but the code on say, the mars probes or some other innocuous project would probably be nice to see. And after all, we paid for it.
I'm not suggesting they'd take our changes and use them, I'm just saying a lot more non-sensitive code could be made public. NASA is, after all, suffering from a lack of public interest right now. Might as well get the disaffected nerds interested again. I know I'd love to have a look.
You mean there's gonna be another Tyson-Secretariat fight? (They were so drunk)
Well, look at it this way: If I were to hypothetically offer you $100, but you told me you were going to buy heroin with it, I might withhold that money from you.
The same goes for anything funded by taxpayers. If most of the folks paying taxes don't like what you're going to do with it, you're not entitled to spend their money. If a municipality decides to block anything because a large contingent of its taxpayers think it should be that way, then so be it. You're not entitled to spend other people's money on something that the majority objects. You'll always have the option of a privately funded service (ie, out of your own pocket, like paying for your own ISP without tax subsidy).
personally, i dont care if anyone's using the public network to look at porn for any moral reason. it probably will, however, reduce bandwidth costs.
Here in DC the doors shut fast and if you try to hold them, they don't open back up, they just stay at the point where you resisted enough to stop them. At this point a person definitely can't fit through. In fact, thats why our dwell times are relatively short. The doors close reasonably soon because usually another train is right behind.
I've just moved down here from NJ and I'm quite impressed with the DC Metrorail. It's clean because they enforce the "no food" policy too.