Maybe it's just me, but I see no reason why people need to be recruited into compsci.
I agree. I am woman in the IT field, and am very passionate about it. I have a degree in Biology -it turns out I am also passionate about science. I understand that universities care about demographics across programs, but you rarely hear about programs trying to attract more men for Women's Studies, do you? Anyway, my main point is, attracting women to CS can be all fine and good, but what I would really like to see is a job market that is more gender balanced. There still exists a school of thought that women are less suited to IT. More women with CS degrees may help this some, but in the end, not everyone who is interested in IT work necessarily gets a CS degree.
The statement that there are no small broadcast radio stations is simply untrue. You seem to have forgotten about the hundreds of small college radio stations, and non-profit community stations. Many of these would not be able to continue to operate if the same fees they are throwing at internet radio were applied to broadcast. Not to mention, many of these stations increase their base by broadcasting both over the air and on the internet. I wonder how these new fees affect stations that do both... are they getting double-screwed?
I agree with you, and have to add: why are specific versions of software listed?! I mean, for example, Photoshop 3.0? If Photoshop is revolutionary compared with all else in its class (which some I'm sure would argue that it is), then why not list 1.0 - since that is where all subsequent versions arose from. And could they really say that 4.0 was less innovative than 3.0? What about modern versions which can do so much more? I fail to understand what exactly they are basing their choices on, but I can surmise that its a fairly arbitrary decision-making process.
While this might not answer all of the questions that you have, here is one additional thought that might help. As colonies grow, eventually individuals split off to form new colonies. So you have a queen who produces her many, varied offspring. Some might be carrying mutations that will give them some competitive advantage, others carry some that will work to make them weaker. The queen gives rise to a new queen who leaves the colony with a subset of the parent colony to establish a new one. Think of the parent colony (as the other responder said) as the parent itself. Think of the offshoot colonies as the offspring. Now whatever mutations these individuals are carrying will either help their new colony thrive, or not. Advantageous mutations could be being carried at any level in these new colonies, and they will either help or hurt that colonies chance of thriving and producing more offshoot colonies.
I don't believe that it is at all a matter of brain "size" that is the issue. They have proven through historical studies that many intellectuals of the past whose brains have been weighed have shown that brain size and intelligence are not related. What they did find, especially in the case of Einstein, was not that his brain was larger or heavier than average, but that when dissected, his brain had many more dendrites than average.
Exactly. The last company I worked did that exact thing in several departments. Less than a year later, both stepped down so they could go back to what they had been doing previously. Small companies commonly take this approach as they grow. Having a manager that knows the job is important, but they have to also want to be a manager. Both elements being present are what make a good manager in the IT world, and beyond.
I can't fail to notice that in your post flaming the parent for not citing a reference for their statement, that you also fail to cite a reference for your statement.
And now on to my advice to the questioner. A couple of years ago I accepted a job doing web work for a porn company. Now there are two mindsets that came crashing into conflict for me - that porn inherently is harmful to participants (namely, the women participants) and women in general (encouraging objectification, use as sexual objects, etc. etc.) versus the idea that those who get involved willingly and knowledgably accept and agree to what they are about to get paid for.
What did I do?
I did my job, and accepted that while I would certainly never choose to participate, at least all of the work that we produced was of (relatively) good taste, everyone was verified to be of legal age, and generally, everyone seemed to be having fun. So, I set aside my judgements and decided that everyone has a right to choose what they do in their life, what they consume, and what morals they uphold. I found that the work didn't bother me, and I never felt that my own morals where being compromised. Objectification is everywhere, in everything we do. If you can honestly say that you consume no product or service that exploits other humans in any way (sex appeal, sweatshops, whatever the case may be - exploitation comes in many forms), then maybe you can ride away from this project or your job on a high horse. Not to be harsh, but seriously, I really think you just need to relax a bit. The world is a crazy place, and some people are quite proud to bare their bodies for art, sex, or science.
One thing that I can see that makes this study controversial is the introduction of the predator lizards onto the islands where they did not currently occur. While the article does state that occasionally islands are naturally newly colonized from other islands, this is still an unnatural occurrence, and could be seen as disruption of the ecosystem of the islands.
I would like to point out to you that G.W. Bush was not a stellar businessman in his years prior to becoming governor of Texas. A quick bit of internet research will cite that. I originally learned about his many failed business pursuits on a Frontline special on Bush several years ago.
As far as Bush's economic expansion... I just don't even know where to begin with that one.
Now I don't know anything about law in Japan, but I don't see how this could hold water here in the states. First of all, has no one ever heard of a 'cover band'?? Seriously, if every band out there paid royalties to play covers, than it is doubtful that any unsigned bands ever would perform them. As a matter of example, Tucson, AZ hosts a yearly event called The Great Arizona Coverup, where local bands all pick a group and perform covers. People pay to come to the event, and I can again guarantee that all of those clubs and bars are not paying royalties to anyone in order to host such an event. Nor could they be sued over it. Fair use standards apply here. If I'm not mistaken, in order to record covers, bands need permission from the copyright holder. Whether or not royalties are paid are determined through the permissive agreement between the copyright holder and the user.
It pains me everytime people start squawking "ZOMG copyrights!! RIAA is out to get us!!" People have been permorming other peoples' works for years, both live and recorded, and will continue to do so.
Sadly, it is a sign that most/.ers don't get out enough if I have to point out this simple fact that is commonplace on the live music scene (both local and beyond). *sigh*
The thing that is boggling my mind is this: they tout that this could be a viable solution for an upstart company, leading to easy expandability, but where would an upstart house the 'datacenter in a box'? They would need to find a viable location to store it, and then secure it. I'm not sure I understand how this is particularly useful outside of military applications where a mobile field command center would be needed.
Anyone have any ideas on this? I'm genuinely curious how this would work logistically.
"I believe the more communication the better..."
The better for whom? Again, I'm left wondering what makes you think you understand the situation. You talk about 'communication' as if all forms of it are good. I know you are trying to frame your points humanistically, however, without looking at what 'communication' means to the Chinese, as opposed to this or that other culture, ignores just one part of their uniqueness.
I think the point of saying the "the more communication the better" might have some meaning that when people can communicate, they can find out how other people around them feel about issues that they live with, including (but not limited to): oppression, quality of life, human rights, and political and social freedoms. If people can't openly communicate about their human condition, then its easy to be stifled. But when people can openly discuss what is going on in their world, then they can find that others might share similar feelings. This, of course, can lead to civil unrest. Bad for a government regime that wants to stay in power, but generally good for the vast majority as they can organize and attempt to create change that improves their quality of life.
Thus explaining those asking in previous posts about the incomplete cross-over to Linux. Not all applications, some of which are necessary to people's jobs, are currently unavailable in an OSS format. Paying for 80% FEWER Windows licenses is an enormous savings.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe it's just me, but I see no reason why people need to be recruited into compsci.
I agree. I am woman in the IT field, and am very passionate about it. I have a degree in Biology -it turns out I am also passionate about science. I understand that universities care about demographics across programs, but you rarely hear about programs trying to attract more men for Women's Studies, do you? Anyway, my main point is, attracting women to CS can be all fine and good, but what I would really like to see is a job market that is more gender balanced. There still exists a school of thought that women are less suited to IT. More women with CS degrees may help this some, but in the end, not everyone who is interested in IT work necessarily gets a CS degree.
The statement that there are no small broadcast radio stations is simply untrue. You seem to have forgotten about the hundreds of small college radio stations, and non-profit community stations. Many of these would not be able to continue to operate if the same fees they are throwing at internet radio were applied to broadcast. Not to mention, many of these stations increase their base by broadcasting both over the air and on the internet. I wonder how these new fees affect stations that do both... are they getting double-screwed?
Unless of course, as we have seen more and more these days, its the 15 yr. old who is carrying the gun...
I agree with you, and have to add: why are specific versions of software listed?! I mean, for example, Photoshop 3.0? If Photoshop is revolutionary compared with all else in its class (which some I'm sure would argue that it is), then why not list 1.0 - since that is where all subsequent versions arose from. And could they really say that 4.0 was less innovative than 3.0? What about modern versions which can do so much more? I fail to understand what exactly they are basing their choices on, but I can surmise that its a fairly arbitrary decision-making process.
While this might not answer all of the questions that you have, here is one additional thought that might help. As colonies grow, eventually individuals split off to form new colonies. So you have a queen who produces her many, varied offspring. Some might be carrying mutations that will give them some competitive advantage, others carry some that will work to make them weaker. The queen gives rise to a new queen who leaves the colony with a subset of the parent colony to establish a new one. Think of the parent colony (as the other responder said) as the parent itself. Think of the offshoot colonies as the offspring. Now whatever mutations these individuals are carrying will either help their new colony thrive, or not. Advantageous mutations could be being carried at any level in these new colonies, and they will either help or hurt that colonies chance of thriving and producing more offshoot colonies.
Without soap, google will become a hippy.
Thank you! It gives me a glimmer of hope that there are still people in this world that understand this.
I don't believe that it is at all a matter of brain "size" that is the issue. They have proven through historical studies that many intellectuals of the past whose brains have been weighed have shown that brain size and intelligence are not related. What they did find, especially in the case of Einstein, was not that his brain was larger or heavier than average, but that when dissected, his brain had many more dendrites than average.
The major problem is that kids today aren't being taught to think critically and explore, they are being taught to take standardized tests.
Exactly. The last company I worked did that exact thing in several departments. Less than a year later, both stepped down so they could go back to what they had been doing previously. Small companies commonly take this approach as they grow. Having a manager that knows the job is important, but they have to also want to be a manager. Both elements being present are what make a good manager in the IT world, and beyond.
I can't fail to notice that in your post flaming the parent for not citing a reference for their statement, that you also fail to cite a reference for your statement.
Great point there, zoeblade.
And now on to my advice to the questioner. A couple of years ago I accepted a job doing web work for a porn company. Now there are two mindsets that came crashing into conflict for me - that porn inherently is harmful to participants (namely, the women participants) and women in general (encouraging objectification, use as sexual objects, etc. etc.) versus the idea that those who get involved willingly and knowledgably accept and agree to what they are about to get paid for.
What did I do?
I did my job, and accepted that while I would certainly never choose to participate, at least all of the work that we produced was of (relatively) good taste, everyone was verified to be of legal age, and generally, everyone seemed to be having fun. So, I set aside my judgements and decided that everyone has a right to choose what they do in their life, what they consume, and what morals they uphold. I found that the work didn't bother me, and I never felt that my own morals where being compromised. Objectification is everywhere, in everything we do. If you can honestly say that you consume no product or service that exploits other humans in any way (sex appeal, sweatshops, whatever the case may be - exploitation comes in many forms), then maybe you can ride away from this project or your job on a high horse. Not to be harsh, but seriously, I really think you just need to relax a bit. The world is a crazy place, and some people are quite proud to bare their bodies for art, sex, or science.
PATHTBEIPAS (Pointless Acronyms That Have To Be Explained In Parentheses Are Silly)
One thing that I can see that makes this study controversial is the introduction of the predator lizards onto the islands where they did not currently occur. While the article does state that occasionally islands are naturally newly colonized from other islands, this is still an unnatural occurrence, and could be seen as disruption of the ecosystem of the islands.
"More on the Gates-gate scandal after this..."
My brain hurts already.
I would like to point out to you that G.W. Bush was not a stellar businessman in his years prior to becoming governor of Texas. A quick bit of internet research will cite that. I originally learned about his many failed business pursuits on a Frontline special on Bush several years ago.
As far as Bush's economic expansion... I just don't even know where to begin with that one.
All your burg are belong to us! (and your grammar, too)
And armies across the globe suddenly shrank by 59%.
Now I don't know anything about law in Japan, but I don't see how this could hold water here in the states. First of all, has no one ever heard of a 'cover band'?? Seriously, if every band out there paid royalties to play covers, than it is doubtful that any unsigned bands ever would perform them. As a matter of example, Tucson, AZ hosts a yearly event called The Great Arizona Coverup, where local bands all pick a group and perform covers. People pay to come to the event, and I can again guarantee that all of those clubs and bars are not paying royalties to anyone in order to host such an event. Nor could they be sued over it. Fair use standards apply here. If I'm not mistaken, in order to record covers, bands need permission from the copyright holder. Whether or not royalties are paid are determined through the permissive agreement between the copyright holder and the user. /.ers don't get out enough if I have to point out this simple fact that is commonplace on the live music scene (both local and beyond). *sigh*
It pains me everytime people start squawking "ZOMG copyrights!! RIAA is out to get us!!" People have been permorming other peoples' works for years, both live and recorded, and will continue to do so.
Sadly, it is a sign that most
The thing that is boggling my mind is this: they tout that this could be a viable solution for an upstart company, leading to easy expandability, but where would an upstart house the 'datacenter in a box'? They would need to find a viable location to store it, and then secure it. I'm not sure I understand how this is particularly useful outside of military applications where a mobile field command center would be needed.
Anyone have any ideas on this? I'm genuinely curious how this would work logistically.
Well, last I checked 100% of children WITH autism also consume water, so your example is rather flawed.
I think the point of saying the "the more communication the better" might have some meaning that when people can communicate, they can find out how other people around them feel about issues that they live with, including (but not limited to): oppression, quality of life, human rights, and political and social freedoms. If people can't openly communicate about their human condition, then its easy to be stifled. But when people can openly discuss what is going on in their world, then they can find that others might share similar feelings. This, of course, can lead to civil unrest. Bad for a government regime that wants to stay in power, but generally good for the vast majority as they can organize and attempt to create change that improves their quality of life.
Extended field trails on psychophysical effects are needed before such technology is approved by FDA or equivalent regulatory organizaiton.
By equivalent regulatory organization one can only assume you mean the FCC
I agree with you in so many ways. The number one complaint by college professors about incoming freshman is lack of critical thinking skills.
Thus explaining those asking in previous posts about the incomplete cross-over to Linux. Not all applications, some of which are necessary to people's jobs, are currently unavailable in an OSS format. Paying for 80% FEWER Windows licenses is an enormous savings.