Seriously, every time I hear what Carmack is up to Im never disappointed. I hope to emulate his productivity one day. Also with respect to VR, I wish him luck. VR has always been a bitch and I doubt it'll be easy. Though he could potentially push id toward devqeloping VR for the military and thus keeping id above water.
I just graduated with a pure math BS from UCSD with a minor in CS. I got hired by Metron (www.metsci.com) as an operations analyst. Which is essentially just answering questions and doing research for the DOD. As someone who is also a tutor, I can also understand your wife's position. A good question to ask is what did she specialize in? I specialized in probability theory and real analysis, this lends it self to multiple careers. If you specialize in math education your options might be more limited since those courses tend to take away from your time attending more applicable courses. That said, private tutoring is lucrative if you know how to do it and know who to look for. People who tutor calculus are sought out pretty often, given that a lot of high school calc courses are less than adequate. Other things to consider, she probably could market her self as someone with high critical thinking skills and thus apply for positions, that while not math oriented, will accept math majors.
This is, for the lack of a better term, retarded. "Gamers rights"? What exactly are those? The right to play games? The right not to have your entertainment medium taxed? This is the sort of thing that pushes me away from "gaming" culture. The idea that a group of people who consume a particular form of entertainment need a group to represent them is a bit ridiculous. Game developers might want to form a group in order to get better working conditions and rules on "crunch" time, but this is too much for me.
I don't think this is a very popular opinion, but maybe someone can post a few reasons as to why they see my position as wrong.
Also, "gaming" culture is becoming annoying. I enjoy competitive circles like Tribes, SC2, and Quake Live, but far too often I just see people ruin things by endlessly reiterating the same "jokes"/quotes from games in order to, I guess unconsciously, identify them selves as a gamer to everyone else. Reddit, as an example, seems to harbor this kind of attitude.
This is the case in all of the states. The leading cause of death is heart disease, most people only care about cancer and aids though (leading cause of death in the world is heart disease, more than cancer and aids combined). Yet, I never see any stickers on the back of cars shaped like a heart. Needless to say, but cancer researchers have done a much better job of marketing than those working on heart disease.
At least all the pharma companies know where the money is at (heart medication). Too bad their recent research efforts have ended rather POORLY.
This is what happens when you introduce concepts of computability theory and complexity theory to individuals not truly interested in math. After taking computability at top 20 university... the way they introduce "proofs" is so soft as to be meaningless. Then they continue to use the same text book in the graduate course on complexity theory... so annoying. Then we get things like the "research" in the article.
The way I understand it is that they never sold mortgages. They sold insurance (Credit Default Swaps) on the low end or per-packeged mortgage clumps, but unlike an insurance company they didn't have to have the requisite capital to enter these contracts... and when the mortgages went under they had to pay the mortgage holders the losses they took on that mortgage.
simplified, they gave insurance to banks who sold mortgages on houses... those mortgages went bust and thus they had to pay. But they didn't have the capital to pay thus the shit storm.
PDE's are a SMALL part of math. When considering the actual applicable maths involved in programming (note algorithms and not just computing some math function) it's limited to the algebras and discrete fields. Abstract algebra, Topology, Computability theory and complexity theory (which are math fields regardless of what any CS department would have you believe).... These are the tools used to approximate the PDE's with Finite element analysis and Eulers method. And saying "not to the same level of rigor that a PhD math would receive" is sort of misleading, engineers tend to be taught how to compute PDE's and reduce them to manageable diff eqs... this is no where near what is involved in PhD level work..... I had a PhD Mechanical engineer in my undergraduate Real analysis class, which is not required for grad engineers but is smiled upon.
PhD Math grads probably wouldn't even consider just programming for a career... they get sent off to the NSA and Finance sectors to do some serious shit.
I'm graduating this June from UCSD, with a degree in Pure Math and a minor in CS with Probability theory knowledge up to and including stochastic process. What company is this for? I'd be interested in applying.
For the ones you posted, if I can be a bit pedantic, none of them reference a Math degree except for one who references a master in applied math (PDE's... eh). But I can tell that many people aren't getting what they expected from returning to college.
As a Math student minoring in CS, I'm worried about my own job prospects. Even when I work hard and will leave with experience in several important fields. I feel like even when I am working in a difficult major I'm heading towards an uncertain employment future. Any advice?
Considering Autodesk actually stands to gain a little by allowing individual pirates to use their software (ie hobbyists who cant afford outrageous fees) , I am surprised to see them on this list. I would also be surprised to see adobe on here, but gladly they are not.
Large communities surround 3D studio max, Maya, and Mudbox. The likelihood they paid for the software is minimal, and the likelihood they make content that generates revenue is even smaller. But! They also become the back bone to an industry of artists who DO create revenue generating content. Allowing younger individuals to use this software builds, how ever silly, alliances to that software and in turn probable profit for Autodesk down the line.
I would like to hear arguments against this position though.
I am wondering whether it was her specifically who did it. I have been lead to believe that high-school students work under PHD researchers. Specifically, she was working under a Stanford PHD researcher with 10 - 20 years experience researching cancer. So, I take this with a grain of salt.
What advantage does this offer that could justify the upper bound on pricing? Is there anything that could justify a 4K price? or is this just a novel idea thing?
This is somewhat similar to how some artists obtain normal maps for textures. They go and take source pictures of materials (bricks, grass, what ever), then for each photo they bring a light and shine a light on the scene from four different directions. This allows you to obtain the height information later on back at the PC. This gives you a realistic normal map for the surfaces you've been taking references of. Now, the problem being that this only works with surface deformations of a certain height. Also the angle you place the light at determines how "bumpy" the normal map is going to be. I presume those issues are worked out in the MIT device, but this works for nearly flat surfaces best.... anything else and you'll get "shadows" of objects overlapping each other.
The resolution and scale are what most impress me here though.:)
Why is this rated interesting? Or being modded up at all?
The parent post couldn't be further from interesting or considered close to a rational thought. Tons of assumptions, false claims, and ignorance abound. 1. It's not on rails. 2. It seems the parent hasn't even seen video of the gameplay. (considering characters react to where you shoot them in realistic ways) 3. Having not played the game the parent has already written it off as similar to every other FPS. 4. It seems the parent thinks Carmack is the game designer, which has never been the case. 5. Mega Texturing is a bit more than clever.
Slashdot Mirror
My feelings exactly. If I had mod points I'd give them instead of commenting.
Seriously, every time I hear what Carmack is up to Im never disappointed. I hope to emulate his productivity one day. Also with respect to VR, I wish him luck. VR has always been a bitch and I doubt it'll be easy. Though he could potentially push id toward devqeloping VR for the military and thus keeping id above water.
I just graduated with a pure math BS from UCSD with a minor in CS. I got hired by Metron (www.metsci.com) as an operations analyst. Which is essentially just answering questions and doing research for the DOD. As someone who is also a tutor, I can also understand your wife's position. A good question to ask is what did she specialize in? I specialized in probability theory and real analysis, this lends it self to multiple careers. If you specialize in math education your options might be more limited since those courses tend to take away from your time attending more applicable courses. That said, private tutoring is lucrative if you know how to do it and know who to look for. People who tutor calculus are sought out pretty often, given that a lot of high school calc courses are less than adequate. Other things to consider, she probably could market her self as someone with high critical thinking skills and thus apply for positions, that while not math oriented, will accept math majors.
Hope she finds something better :)
This is, for the lack of a better term, retarded. "Gamers rights"? What exactly are those? The right to play games? The right not to have your entertainment medium taxed? This is the sort of thing that pushes me away from "gaming" culture. The idea that a group of people who consume a particular form of entertainment need a group to represent them is a bit ridiculous. Game developers might want to form a group in order to get better working conditions and rules on "crunch" time, but this is too much for me.
I don't think this is a very popular opinion, but maybe someone can post a few reasons as to why they see my position as wrong.
Also, "gaming" culture is becoming annoying. I enjoy competitive circles like Tribes, SC2, and Quake Live, but far too often I just see people ruin things by endlessly reiterating the same "jokes"/quotes from games in order to, I guess unconsciously, identify them selves as a gamer to everyone else. Reddit, as an example, seems to harbor this kind of attitude.
This is the case in all of the states. The leading cause of death is heart disease, most people only care about cancer and aids though (leading cause of death in the world is heart disease, more than cancer and aids combined). Yet, I never see any stickers on the back of cars shaped like a heart. Needless to say, but cancer researchers have done a much better job of marketing than those working on heart disease.
At least all the pharma companies know where the money is at (heart medication). Too bad their recent research efforts have ended rather POORLY.
This is what happens when you introduce concepts of computability theory and complexity theory to individuals not truly interested in math. After taking computability at top 20 university... the way they introduce "proofs" is so soft as to be meaningless. Then they continue to use the same text book in the graduate course on complexity theory... so annoying. Then we get things like the "research" in the article.
.. I can't help but think of this as more of a way to make data look the way you want it to.
In short, a visually pleasing way to bend the facts that are presented in the data.
The way I understand it is that they never sold mortgages. They sold insurance (Credit Default Swaps) on the low end or per-packeged mortgage clumps, but unlike an insurance company they didn't have to have the requisite capital to enter these contracts... and when the mortgages went under they had to pay the mortgage holders the losses they took on that mortgage.
simplified, they gave insurance to banks who sold mortgages on houses... those mortgages went bust and thus they had to pay. But they didn't have the capital to pay thus the shit storm.
Alright I applied for an internship. Hoping this works out haha.
PDE's are a SMALL part of math. When considering the actual applicable maths involved in programming (note algorithms and not just computing some math function) it's limited to the algebras and discrete fields. Abstract algebra, Topology, Computability theory and complexity theory (which are math fields regardless of what any CS department would have you believe).... These are the tools used to approximate the PDE's with Finite element analysis and Eulers method. And saying "not to the same level of rigor that a PhD math would receive" is sort of misleading, engineers tend to be taught how to compute PDE's and reduce them to manageable diff eqs... this is no where near what is involved in PhD level work..... I had a PhD Mechanical engineer in my undergraduate Real analysis class, which is not required for grad engineers but is smiled upon.
PhD Math grads probably wouldn't even consider just programming for a career... they get sent off to the NSA and Finance sectors to do some serious shit.
I'm graduating this June from UCSD, with a degree in Pure Math and a minor in CS with Probability theory knowledge up to and including stochastic process. What company is this for? I'd be interested in applying.
Thanks to all who replied, I appreciate it.
the "important fields" being
- Real analysis (Up to Stokes theorem and Lebesgue integration)
- Abstract Algebra (up to Galois theory)
- Probability theory (Stochastic processes)
- Numerical Analysis (Matrices mostly)
- GPU- Programming
- Graphics Programming (Opengl + Direct3D)
- Complexity theory (grad material)
That's pretty nice if you ask me.
For the ones you posted, if I can be a bit pedantic, none of them reference a Math degree except for one who references a master in applied math (PDE's ... eh). But I can tell that many people aren't getting what they expected from returning to college.
As a Math student minoring in CS, I'm worried about my own job prospects. Even when I work hard and will leave with experience in several important fields. I feel like even when I am working in a difficult major I'm heading towards an uncertain employment future. Any advice?
Also, Monster cables is on this list. Which is HILARIOUS... considering they ARE the crooks. Fucking amazing.
Considering Autodesk actually stands to gain a little by allowing individual pirates to use their software (ie hobbyists who cant afford outrageous fees) , I am surprised to see them on this list. I would also be surprised to see adobe on here, but gladly they are not.
Large communities surround 3D studio max, Maya, and Mudbox. The likelihood they paid for the software is minimal, and the likelihood they make content that generates revenue is even smaller. But! They also become the back bone to an industry of artists who DO create revenue generating content. Allowing younger individuals to use this software builds, how ever silly, alliances to that software and in turn probable profit for Autodesk down the line.
I would like to hear arguments against this position though.
Thoughts?
I am wondering whether it was her specifically who did it. I have been lead to believe that high-school students work under PHD researchers. Specifically, she was working under a Stanford PHD researcher with 10 - 20 years experience researching cancer. So, I take this with a grain of salt.
What advantage does this offer that could justify the upper bound on pricing? Is there anything that could justify a 4K price? or is this just a novel idea thing?
I don't know, ever since Richard Hamilton developed Ricci Flows at UCSD?
It just so happens that I am studying math at university, nothing in chaos theory though. Wish me luck!
This is somewhat similar to how some artists obtain normal maps for textures.
They go and take source pictures of materials (bricks, grass, what ever), then for each photo they bring a light and shine a light on the scene from four different directions. This allows you to obtain the height information later on back at the PC. This gives you a realistic normal map for the surfaces you've been taking references of. Now, the problem being that this only works with surface deformations of a certain height. Also the angle you place the light at determines how "bumpy" the normal map is going to be. I presume those issues are worked out in the MIT device, but this works for nearly flat surfaces best.... anything else and you'll get "shadows" of objects overlapping each other.
The resolution and scale are what most impress me here though. :)
You mean doom 3? I don't think it's hard to have more fun when you're pitting every indie game over the past few years with one game from 2005.
Why is this rated interesting? Or being modded up at all?
The parent post couldn't be further from interesting or considered close to a rational thought.
Tons of assumptions, false claims, and ignorance abound.
1. It's not on rails.
2. It seems the parent hasn't even seen video of the gameplay. (considering characters react to where you shoot them in realistic ways)
3. Having not played the game the parent has already written it off as similar to every other FPS.
4. It seems the parent thinks Carmack is the game designer, which has never been the case.
5. Mega Texturing is a bit more than clever.
In conclusion,
Bad mods, stop doing that!
More older people are playing games year on year. That would be the most plausible reason for the discrepancy.