As a current UK PhD student nearing the end of my three years, in my opinion you're looking for the wrong thing. Everyone will tell you that you need to be very passionate about your research and that it is the key to success. However, I don't feel that its true. The relationship between the student and supervisor is the most important aspect. If you don't have a good relationship, you will fail. So you should look for a supervisor that you can trust, who has the important qualities and skills (e.g. good communicator) and is willing to make time for you. You want a supervisor who is not happy with the way your current institution teaches its students, but instead is constantly evaluating him or herself to better the way they provide such an education. You don't want someone who will get lost in their own research, or is too busy as a Professor to see you often enough. I think the only way you will know who would work well with you is by comparing the lecturers who taught you for your undergraduate degree. Which ones were happy to provide assistance (e.g. timely, polite responses to your emails?) Which ones made the effort in lectures to aid your understanding by providing voice recordings of their lectures if you missed them, or mind-maps for each lecture, or turned up 15 minutes early if you had any problems? I chose this individual over a particular research topic. Obviously, the down side is that for three years I've been stuck researching artificial neural networks - which may or may not be my first choice. But I don't think I would be 3 months away from finishing if I was being supervised by any other member of staff in my department. Once you have the PhD, you are free to research what ever you like.
Mod parent up! Good common sense should prevail, but rarely does.
Actually, I don't understand the legal system in the US. It seems rather complicated and time consuming. I'm not an expect in the UK either, but we don't appear to have the same high-octane/hollywood-blockbuster-action-film-like corporate law suit actions on a semi regular basis.
Software patents seem to just suck. (NB - I am very biased, i.e. I don't have any software patents)
It would be neat but...
If most internet traffic was encrypted, maybe more funding would be provided by governments to snooping authorities. If my traffic is encrypted, but everyone else's isnt, maybe the authorities would be content at just looking at everyone elses traffic.
Then again, if i'm in the minority encrypting traffic, maybe I stand out a bit too much and will draw more attention to myself.
Perhaps this is my kobayashi maru.
I'm interested in expanding my CSS skills, and to be fair, IE did drive me close to insanity.
I made the daft mistake of building a website on a linux box with Firefox, then testing it with IE afterwards. I definately recommend checking with the big three browsers at all times.
I also bought a really good book,
"CSS MASTERY
Advanced Web Standards Solutions"
by Budd, Moll and Collison. ISBN 1-59059-614-5 (www.friendsofed.com)
I've found it far more useful than w3 schools website - if only because it has dedicated chapters detailing the cross browser issues. My only criticism is that it seems to cover everything but fonts. I know it says Advanced in the title, but a very small chapter on fonts would really make this book feel complete. Still, I'd definately recommend it to people who are still using table based layouts.
Without suggesting a bias towards any nation in the world today, developing such cloaking technology will eventually lead to considerable problems (-IMHO). Leading world power(s) will no doubt be successful in producing such a device, and in the following decades it will become available to other nations or corporations.
Their ability to control other potential seriously dangerous technologies, such as nuclear weapons, will become seriously hampered. Nations attempting to develop such technologies will be able to hide their activities much more effectively; Terrorists are already capable of escaping detention from superior sized and equipped armed forces: which will become easier with such technologies.
History also shows that nations tend to share their technology with lesser developed/equipped nations during a brief time of partnership (e.g. to repel an invading and opposite world power) - only for the partnership to become seriously sour decades later. (e.g. US and Afghanistan vs Soviet Union).
However, I strongly favour the development of new technology and believe it will lead to an improvement in life for all. I'm also an avid Star Trek fan:-)
I just believe that we should take great care with whom we share such technology, if we ever develop it.
Slashdot Mirror
As a current UK PhD student nearing the end of my three years, in my opinion you're looking for the wrong thing. Everyone will tell you that you need to be very passionate about your research and that it is the key to success. However, I don't feel that its true. The relationship between the student and supervisor is the most important aspect. If you don't have a good relationship, you will fail. So you should look for a supervisor that you can trust, who has the important qualities and skills (e.g. good communicator) and is willing to make time for you. You want a supervisor who is not happy with the way your current institution teaches its students, but instead is constantly evaluating him or herself to better the way they provide such an education. You don't want someone who will get lost in their own research, or is too busy as a Professor to see you often enough. I think the only way you will know who would work well with you is by comparing the lecturers who taught you for your undergraduate degree. Which ones were happy to provide assistance (e.g. timely, polite responses to your emails?) Which ones made the effort in lectures to aid your understanding by providing voice recordings of their lectures if you missed them, or mind-maps for each lecture, or turned up 15 minutes early if you had any problems? I chose this individual over a particular research topic. Obviously, the down side is that for three years I've been stuck researching artificial neural networks - which may or may not be my first choice. But I don't think I would be 3 months away from finishing if I was being supervised by any other member of staff in my department. Once you have the PhD, you are free to research what ever you like.
Mod parent up! Good common sense should prevail, but rarely does.
Actually, I don't understand the legal system in the US. It seems rather complicated and time consuming. I'm not an expect in the UK either, but we don't appear to have the same high-octane/hollywood-blockbuster-action-film-like corporate law suit actions on a semi regular basis.
Software patents seem to just suck. (NB - I am very biased, i.e. I don't have any software patents)
It would be neat but... If most internet traffic was encrypted, maybe more funding would be provided by governments to snooping authorities. If my traffic is encrypted, but everyone else's isnt, maybe the authorities would be content at just looking at everyone elses traffic. Then again, if i'm in the minority encrypting traffic, maybe I stand out a bit too much and will draw more attention to myself. Perhaps this is my kobayashi maru.
We don't have software patents in Europe - maybe software companies charge us more for revenge/help protect themselves.
I'm interested in expanding my CSS skills, and to be fair, IE did drive me close to insanity.
I made the daft mistake of building a website on a linux box with Firefox, then testing it with IE afterwards. I definately recommend checking with the big three browsers at all times.
I also bought a really good book,
"CSS MASTERY
Advanced Web Standards Solutions"
by Budd, Moll and Collison. ISBN 1-59059-614-5 (www.friendsofed.com)
I've found it far more useful than w3 schools website - if only because it has dedicated chapters detailing the cross browser issues. My only criticism is that it seems to cover everything but fonts. I know it says Advanced in the title, but a very small chapter on fonts would really make this book feel complete. Still, I'd definately recommend it to people who are still using table based layouts.
Without suggesting a bias towards any nation in the world today, developing such cloaking technology will eventually lead to considerable problems (-IMHO). Leading world power(s) will no doubt be successful in producing such a device, and in the following decades it will become available to other nations or corporations.
:-)
Their ability to control other potential seriously dangerous technologies, such as nuclear weapons, will become seriously hampered. Nations attempting to develop such technologies will be able to hide their activities much more effectively; Terrorists are already capable of escaping detention from superior sized and equipped armed forces: which will become easier with such technologies.
History also shows that nations tend to share their technology with lesser developed/equipped nations during a brief time of partnership (e.g. to repel an invading and opposite world power) - only for the partnership to become seriously sour decades later. (e.g. US and Afghanistan vs Soviet Union).
However, I strongly favour the development of new technology and believe it will lead to an improvement in life for all. I'm also an avid Star Trek fan
I just believe that we should take great care with whom we share such technology, if we ever develop it.