Too many people go for a 4-year degree, and far too many companies require such a degree for jobs that, in truth, only require a AA/AS degree.
There are two problems here. And we're attempting to blame the victims here in an effort to conceal the growing uncomfortable truth. We don't need a lot of people anymore...period.
The job market is getting more and more competitive because we're needing less and less workers. It used to be that you had a balance between market forces on supply of labor and demand for labor. No more. We now have an oversupply of labor. As a result a Burger King is getting closer and closer to a point where they can pick up over-skilled workers at rock bottom prices. At that point you'll still need a college degree for menial labor... why? Because someone else applying will have a college degree.
The other problem is that an AA or AS only is usually only useful for a specific job. What happens when that job goes away? Then we're back to again blaming the victims for not preparing for a rapidly changing workforce by over-educating up front to avoid being laid off down the road.
I'm *way* over-educated for my job. But I'm adequately educated to be employable in 4-5 different areas so should my current job go belly up I could quickly move into another employable field. If we encourage exclusively trade school then we need to also recognzie that these people will unemployed more frequently and require further education down the road as a rapidly changing job market eliminates their existing trainable skill.
If you can learn it in an AA... it's probably ripe for automation.
Actually I want to be able to set the limit lower. I don't send to more than 20 people on any given day. But a couple times my email accounts have been hijacked and used to send to 300+ people. If I could have set a limit to 20 that would have been great. Then had a secondary password for overriding the limit on any given day.
Essentially this policy should be translated as "We aren't a mailing list host. If you want to be a mailing list feel free to use Constant Contact."
There's actually a pretty solid line of reasoning that I've heard from economists that failures fuel innovation.
Your client, a silicon crystal grower, may not have gotten 'picked' as a loan investment but he does benefit when a failed pick liquidates their equipment at firesale prices.
For instance Tesla (another government 'pick') has benefited enormously from the NUMMI firesale.
As to your "Government is not smart enough to pick winners"... maybe not but the free market isn't reckless enough to properly fund potential winners. Sometimes you need to waste money to seed new industries. The government 'wasted' money on the aviation industry initially as well. Through the first and second world wars we invested huge sums of money in aviation R&D. Jet aircraft then were commercialized out of that "waste".
Capitalism is amazing at reducing prices and finding efficient production means. The problem is that sometimes you need to just dump a huge amount of money on a problem to get it going. And for good reason it's risky business--which is difficult to capitalize. There's a huge downside and almost no up-side for profit.
And neither does the FDIC. The FDIC sort of promises you can get some of your money back, eventually, but how long eventually is, and whether or not your money has any worth if they have to go on a printing spree...
'Eventually' according to the placards in my bank say usually within 2 business days.
I agree completely, a majority of the best tools come out of users who have a workable understanding of programming who solve real problems with mediocre software.
Forget impacts, the most damning piece of evidence to me is that nobody saw a giant comet at night on our doorstep. Aren't comets known for their visibility *millions* of miles away? But this one is somehow a stealth comet that nobody sees except when silhouetted against the sun?
My question would be... how is it that a massive comet could pass near earth and nobody see it at night? Shouldn't it have been visible at night a day later as it traveled away?
I would take that bet. I'm sure the Verizon CEO is completely oblivious to what his phone does or does not have and therefore would never in a million years think to ask for it to be removed.
You could probably skip that whole step and just jump to the easiest possible solution.
1) Open a web browser. 2) type in "Facebook.com"
What do you want to bet that the thief remained logged in?
If that doesn't work check the web history and see where they've been. Then go through site by site and see if any of them are still logged in, then get the name.
If the name and the general address vs WiFi location are one and the same then you've got a slamdunk case for the police to at least just knock on the door and see if the face/facebook picture of the person answering the door are one and the same.
If they are then SURELY the police would have reasonable suspicion to search.
Download Backblaze and use their Wifi location device. If it and the IP address correspond then they have more than "just an IP address" they have what block it's located in and the IP address which will probably correspond.
You know sometimes people *are* copyright holders. So it's not as black and white as "People vs Copyright holders".
Unless of course you're a copyright anarchist in which case it doesn't really matter what the current policy on copyright is, you'll view it as unfair.
Considering thought that probably 50% of slashdot is employed thanks to copyrights and would be unemployed on the street without them I do find it a particularly intriguing position for this website to default to.
"Attempting to give the illusion of endorsement to your argument by propping it up with a quote from a famous intellectual is obnoxious and cliche." - Not Albert Einstein
As the population grows the demand for variety doesn't grow. So 30 people billion people still only read 4 books a year. The vast majority of the 4 books are going to have a lot of cross over.
It's just like the app store model. 99% of all downloads are 15 or fewer different applications. But since 15 application developers get 99% of the sales the price pressure is extreme to the point that consumers expect a $1 price point (makes sense when most of the apps serve an extremely broad audience like angry birds).
So if you make it, you're golden. If you aren't the top 0.1% of creators then your market has been scorched barren.
The problem then becomes that it becomes more and more difficult to unseat the established players or foster new content. The gulf between rolling in caviar and destitute has no bridge and no middle ground. The best way survive then is through diversification. If only 0.1% survive then you hire 1,000 people and pay all of them in hopes that the one winner will subsidize all of the failures.
For novel authors this isn't a particularly new phenomenon. Books are such a low volume industry that it's really really hard for more than a handful of books to be successful every year (unlike say music in which people consume hundreds or thousands of different products a year). But previously authors had alternative jobs to subsidize their hobby writing such as news papers and magazines. But those are also consolidating now into fewer and fewer outlets of creation.
Sure the population has doubled in the US, but the number of journalists has probably halved. The number of journalists needed per person will continue to reduce as the need for local correspondences diminishes. Just because your readership has doubled doesn't mean you need twice as many journalists to cover an event for example.
The problem that the author does a horrible job of addressing is that the market has been expanded from your small locality to the entire globe.
If you write a song or create a film instead of playing a coffee shop you can now sell your work to billions of people.
The problem is that the coffee shop is now there is no need for the 'local creatives' since remote performance (and web-hosted performance) allows billions of people to find the top performers.
If someone was a really great blogger then instead of a few hundred local patrons to influence you can have billions. But that means that less people can 'serve' a greater audience. So even if the price drops to $0.0001 per reader on what the latest/greatest album is from $0.50 for the local music store clerk you're narrowing the window of success.
A long long long time ago you might have a story teller per camp fire. A 50:1 ratio of customers to creatives. Now the only way to make money when each view only nets $0.001 per view is to get 10,000,000 viewers.
We're needing less and less creatives since duplication spreads one artist's work to millions.
Similarly in the invention field you don't need a local engineer designing local solution when mass production means you just hire one engineer who does it really really well.
Yes, everyone benefits from far superior labor (One unbelievably talented singer or engineer can entertain or solve a problem for millions or billions) but we also suffer because we only need the super-stars to fill our lives with content.
Do you think Sun didn't have those guys? Did they fail because they were stupid and lazy?
I think other companies fail because those people working 80 hour weeks are only paid to create crap.
Steve Jobs isn't terribly unique. What's unique is Steve Jobs in a position of influence to devote the resources needed to execute said vision.
A perfect example is something like the iPhone 4s Siri feature. Last week I upgraded to the new version of Windows Phone 7.5 and I was trying out the voice control features. You can say "Text ___" but you can't say "Message ___" or "Send Text To ____"
I was lamenting how incredibly stupid that was. It even shows that it perfectly understood my message "Send Text To _____" it just was too brain dead stupid to know what that means. It would take one intern an hour to come up with a list of phrases to *hard-code* into the phone for a number of situations and associate basic commands to them.
"Send Text to____" "Message ___" "Send a text to _____" "SMS ______" "Send a Message to ____"
Regex those suckers and the feature would actually be pretty cool instead of playing "Guess the magic keyword."
I have to believe (for the sake of my soul) that someone at Microsoft wanted to do that but was *stopped* for some reason from adding the extra 0.5 KBs of synonymous commands for each of the included commands.
It doesn't take a Steve Jobs visionary--it just takes getting rid of the all of the anti-visionaries who are stopping innovation.
Another example, I have a Galaxy Tab. When it shipped its keyboard was useless. I don't just mean "bad" I mean useless. Typing a word would result in a 3-5 second delay. That was how it came out of the box. I fixed it by using a different browser or using a different keyboard.
Who the #)@# ships hundreds of thousands of products but doesn't do something so basic as... I don't know... turn one on and see if the #*^! keyboard works?!
The reason the ipad has been so successful isn't because it's some genius product--it's because the competition is evidently brain dead.
Thank God for Steve Jobs or we might not even have 'acceptable' products. He really pushed at least mediocrity on the industry for which we should all be thankful.
If you've used Windows Phone 7 you would understand what he means by the "app as the central metaphor" being outdated.
I don't need a flickr app, a facebook app and a photo gallery app... I just want to look at my photos regardless of source.
And I want that everywhere. If I email someone a photo I want to be able to email them from my local storage, SkyDrive, Facebook or whatever. The Hub model is far superior to the fragmented app model.
Thankfully saying that "it hasn't happened for thousands of years" is only a strawman propped up by deniers to pretend they have a legitimate beef with global warming.
Agreed. Our power went out for half a day this last week. I was really wishing I could just connect through 4G and keep working from a cloud hosted workstation.
No, like most perceived Slashdot Conspiracies this one is actually once again the least of two evils.
Think about this for one moment, if you go up against a corporation who is more likely to win? Regardless of your case or righteousness, who has the resources to defend/attack you in a trial?
So if you could be tried very easily for malicious prosecution (or the loser of every case had to pay unreasonable legal fees) then no small player would ever risk filing a lawsuit even when they were wronged.
Sure you can be bullied by the legal system but at least you can bully back.
This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
The Old Testament which has been superseded by the New. There's basically two laws you have to follow these days: 1) Love God 2) Love Other People As Much As Yourself.
Everything else is details.
If I had just spent several thousand years murdering and genociding about the country side I would want to sweep it under the rug as "mere details" as well.
The New testament is no better. If I asked you whether or not you thought Star Wars was better than Star Trek and murdered you as a result I would be hung as a psychopath.
If God condemns people to hell for a difference of opinion he's still an upright guy? Nuh uh. Sure Jesus healed a few people, but if he had thrown in a little hint like "Boil thine water and thee shalt not be afflicted with demons of the stomach." He would have saved more people than he ever preached to.
Slashdot Mirror
Too many people go for a 4-year degree, and far too many companies require such a degree for jobs that, in truth, only require a AA/AS degree.
There are two problems here. And we're attempting to blame the victims here in an effort to conceal the growing uncomfortable truth. We don't need a lot of people anymore...period.
The job market is getting more and more competitive because we're needing less and less workers. It used to be that you had a balance between market forces on supply of labor and demand for labor. No more. We now have an oversupply of labor. As a result a Burger King is getting closer and closer to a point where they can pick up over-skilled workers at rock bottom prices. At that point you'll still need a college degree for menial labor... why? Because someone else applying will have a college degree.
The other problem is that an AA or AS only is usually only useful for a specific job. What happens when that job goes away? Then we're back to again blaming the victims for not preparing for a rapidly changing workforce by over-educating up front to avoid being laid off down the road.
I'm *way* over-educated for my job. But I'm adequately educated to be employable in 4-5 different areas so should my current job go belly up I could quickly move into another employable field. If we encourage exclusively trade school then we need to also recognzie that these people will unemployed more frequently and require further education down the road as a rapidly changing job market eliminates their existing trainable skill.
If you can learn it in an AA... it's probably ripe for automation.
Actually I want to be able to set the limit lower. I don't send to more than 20 people on any given day. But a couple times my email accounts have been hijacked and used to send to 300+ people. If I could have set a limit to 20 that would have been great. Then had a secondary password for overriding the limit on any given day.
Essentially this policy should be translated as "We aren't a mailing list host. If you want to be a mailing list feel free to use Constant Contact."
Just so we're clear:
1) If Government 'outsources' its IT costs to a cloud service they're idiots wasting money who got conned into an unreliable and insecure buzzword.
2) If the Government brings tech back in house and doesn't use a cloud service they're slow, unresponsive and stupid.
I'm sorry, is there a third option that we're thinking they should adopt?
There's actually a pretty solid line of reasoning that I've heard from economists that failures fuel innovation.
Your client, a silicon crystal grower, may not have gotten 'picked' as a loan investment but he does benefit when a failed pick liquidates their equipment at firesale prices.
For instance Tesla (another government 'pick') has benefited enormously from the NUMMI firesale.
As to your "Government is not smart enough to pick winners"... maybe not but the free market isn't reckless enough to properly fund potential winners. Sometimes you need to waste money to seed new industries. The government 'wasted' money on the aviation industry initially as well. Through the first and second world wars we invested huge sums of money in aviation R&D. Jet aircraft then were commercialized out of that "waste".
Capitalism is amazing at reducing prices and finding efficient production means. The problem is that sometimes you need to just dump a huge amount of money on a problem to get it going. And for good reason it's risky business--which is difficult to capitalize. There's a huge downside and almost no up-side for profit.
And neither does the FDIC. The FDIC sort of promises you can get some of your money back, eventually, but how long eventually is, and whether or not your money has any worth if they have to go on a printing spree ...
'Eventually' according to the placards in my bank say usually within 2 business days.
I agree completely, a majority of the best tools come out of users who have a workable understanding of programming who solve real problems with mediocre software.
Forget impacts, the most damning piece of evidence to me is that nobody saw a giant comet at night on our doorstep. Aren't comets known for their visibility *millions* of miles away? But this one is somehow a stealth comet that nobody sees except when silhouetted against the sun?
My question would be... how is it that a massive comet could pass near earth and nobody see it at night? Shouldn't it have been visible at night a day later as it traveled away?
I would take that bet. I'm sure the Verizon CEO is completely oblivious to what his phone does or does not have and therefore would never in a million years think to ask for it to be removed.
You could probably skip that whole step and just jump to the easiest possible solution.
1) Open a web browser.
2) type in "Facebook.com"
What do you want to bet that the thief remained logged in?
If that doesn't work check the web history and see where they've been. Then go through site by site and see if any of them are still logged in, then get the name.
If the name and the general address vs WiFi location are one and the same then you've got a slamdunk case for the police to at least just knock on the door and see if the face/facebook picture of the person answering the door are one and the same.
If they are then SURELY the police would have reasonable suspicion to search.
Download Backblaze and use their Wifi location device. If it and the IP address correspond then they have more than "just an IP address" they have what block it's located in and the IP address which will probably correspond.
You know sometimes people *are* copyright holders. So it's not as black and white as "People vs Copyright holders".
Unless of course you're a copyright anarchist in which case it doesn't really matter what the current policy on copyright is, you'll view it as unfair.
Considering thought that probably 50% of slashdot is employed thanks to copyrights and would be unemployed on the street without them I do find it a particularly intriguing position for this website to default to.
The headline should read:
Felicia Day and Will Wheaton's blog loses 60% of active readers.
"Attempting to give the illusion of endorsement to your argument by propping it up with a quote from a famous intellectual is obnoxious and cliche."
- Not Albert Einstein
As the population grows the demand for variety doesn't grow. So 30 people billion people still only read 4 books a year. The vast majority of the 4 books are going to have a lot of cross over.
It's just like the app store model. 99% of all downloads are 15 or fewer different applications. But since 15 application developers get 99% of the sales the price pressure is extreme to the point that consumers expect a $1 price point (makes sense when most of the apps serve an extremely broad audience like angry birds).
So if you make it, you're golden. If you aren't the top 0.1% of creators then your market has been scorched barren.
The problem then becomes that it becomes more and more difficult to unseat the established players or foster new content. The gulf between rolling in caviar and destitute has no bridge and no middle ground. The best way survive then is through diversification. If only 0.1% survive then you hire 1,000 people and pay all of them in hopes that the one winner will subsidize all of the failures.
For novel authors this isn't a particularly new phenomenon. Books are such a low volume industry that it's really really hard for more than a handful of books to be successful every year (unlike say music in which people consume hundreds or thousands of different products a year). But previously authors had alternative jobs to subsidize their hobby writing such as news papers and magazines. But those are also consolidating now into fewer and fewer outlets of creation.
Sure the population has doubled in the US, but the number of journalists has probably halved. The number of journalists needed per person will continue to reduce as the need for local correspondences diminishes. Just because your readership has doubled doesn't mean you need twice as many journalists to cover an event for example.
The problem that the author does a horrible job of addressing is that the market has been expanded from your small locality to the entire globe.
If you write a song or create a film instead of playing a coffee shop you can now sell your work to billions of people.
The problem is that the coffee shop is now there is no need for the 'local creatives' since remote performance (and web-hosted performance) allows billions of people to find the top performers.
If someone was a really great blogger then instead of a few hundred local patrons to influence you can have billions. But that means that less people can 'serve' a greater audience. So even if the price drops to $0.0001 per reader on what the latest/greatest album is from $0.50 for the local music store clerk you're narrowing the window of success.
A long long long time ago you might have a story teller per camp fire. A 50:1 ratio of customers to creatives. Now the only way to make money when each view only nets $0.001 per view is to get 10,000,000 viewers.
We're needing less and less creatives since duplication spreads one artist's work to millions.
Similarly in the invention field you don't need a local engineer designing local solution when mass production means you just hire one engineer who does it really really well.
Yes, everyone benefits from far superior labor (One unbelievably talented singer or engineer can entertain or solve a problem for millions or billions) but we also suffer because we only need the super-stars to fill our lives with content.
Do you think Sun didn't have those guys? Did they fail because they were stupid and lazy?
I think other companies fail because those people working 80 hour weeks are only paid to create crap.
Steve Jobs isn't terribly unique. What's unique is Steve Jobs in a position of influence to devote the resources needed to execute said vision.
A perfect example is something like the iPhone 4s Siri feature. Last week I upgraded to the new version of Windows Phone 7.5 and I was trying out the voice control features. You can say "Text ___" but you can't say "Message ___" or "Send Text To ____"
I was lamenting how incredibly stupid that was. It even shows that it perfectly understood my message "Send Text To _____" it just was too brain dead stupid to know what that means. It would take one intern an hour to come up with a list of phrases to *hard-code* into the phone for a number of situations and associate basic commands to them.
"Send Text to____"
"Message ___"
"Send a text to _____"
"SMS ______"
"Send a Message to ____"
Regex those suckers and the feature would actually be pretty cool instead of playing "Guess the magic keyword."
I have to believe (for the sake of my soul) that someone at Microsoft wanted to do that but was *stopped* for some reason from adding the extra 0.5 KBs of synonymous commands for each of the included commands.
It doesn't take a Steve Jobs visionary--it just takes getting rid of the all of the anti-visionaries who are stopping innovation.
Another example, I have a Galaxy Tab. When it shipped its keyboard was useless. I don't just mean "bad" I mean useless. Typing a word would result in a 3-5 second delay. That was how it came out of the box. I fixed it by using a different browser or using a different keyboard.
Who the #)@# ships hundreds of thousands of products but doesn't do something so basic as... I don't know... turn one on and see if the #*^! keyboard works?!
The reason the ipad has been so successful isn't because it's some genius product--it's because the competition is evidently brain dead.
Thank God for Steve Jobs or we might not even have 'acceptable' products. He really pushed at least mediocrity on the industry for which we should all be thankful.
If you've used Windows Phone 7 you would understand what he means by the "app as the central metaphor" being outdated.
I don't need a flickr app, a facebook app and a photo gallery app... I just want to look at my photos regardless of source.
And I want that everywhere. If I email someone a photo I want to be able to email them from my local storage, SkyDrive, Facebook or whatever. The Hub model is far superior to the fragmented app model.
Thankfully saying that "it hasn't happened for thousands of years" is only a strawman propped up by deniers to pretend they have a legitimate beef with global warming.
Optical media isn't a great option yet. Best is LTO right now.
Agreed. Our power went out for half a day this last week. I was really wishing I could just connect through 4G and keep working from a cloud hosted workstation.
No, like most perceived Slashdot Conspiracies this one is actually once again the least of two evils.
Think about this for one moment, if you go up against a corporation who is more likely to win? Regardless of your case or righteousness, who has the resources to defend/attack you in a trial?
So if you could be tried very easily for malicious prosecution (or the loser of every case had to pay unreasonable legal fees) then no small player would ever risk filing a lawsuit even when they were wronged.
Sure you can be bullied by the legal system but at least you can bully back.
This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
Romans 3:22-24
Misguided or biblically sound?
You missed half the conversation.
In the work of fiction the alien scientists said "We disproved multiple universe."
You're a bit out of date.
The Old Testament which has been superseded by the New. There's basically two laws you have to follow these days:
1) Love God
2) Love Other People As Much As Yourself.
Everything else is details.
If I had just spent several thousand years murdering and genociding about the country side I would want to sweep it under the rug as "mere details" as well.
The New testament is no better. If I asked you whether or not you thought Star Wars was better than Star Trek and murdered you as a result I would be hung as a psychopath.
If God condemns people to hell for a difference of opinion he's still an upright guy? Nuh uh. Sure Jesus healed a few people, but if he had thrown in a little hint like "Boil thine water and thee shalt not be afflicted with demons of the stomach." He would have saved more people than he ever preached to.