I mean, reading it, it is very accusatory, aggressive and rude. As a project founder, you don't have the luxury of doing something like this. That is, unless the tone of your project/general community, is such that this is acceptable. But, is that a tone that is really wanted?
It uses language as close to natural as I think a programming language can. It also forces proper indentation, which, as we all know, is very important for readability. It's also a scripting language that is very useful in RAD. All in all, it's a very good first language for those that don't want a C, hair pulling out, first experience. It also runs pretty much everywhere. Also, if you want to do graphics and/or games, there's Tkinter, PyOpenGL and PyGame.
Most (?) programmers have this thing about languages. They program in different ones until they find one they really *really* like. After that, EVERYTHING is about that language. Unfortunately, this is ridiculous.
Every language has its strengths and weaknesses. Every programmer has certain levels of competency with the different languages. Every project has its requirements.
In other words, pick the language that best meets the requirements of the project FIRST. THEN look at your competency in that language and come to the conclusion whether to proceed to the next best language, or use that one.
Btw, I once learned a language to do a project *while* *working* *in* *industry*. If you aren't able to do that, or don't want to do that, then this industry probably isn't as compatible with you as you think.
But, if you want my opinion based on my experience: learn as many languages as you can. The more languages you learn, the better you will be overall. You'll be surprised just how different you have to think in any given language to get the job done.
So, this student spams (according to the article) 391 University Profs. How is that not spam? Oh wait, it is. Also, there are ways of making such complaints; there are always committees to deal with such things. Attempting to circumvent that system by bulk email, is arguably unethical (not to mention profoundly stupid).
So, this really isn't about a student using there right of free speech, as the defence claims. It's about the *abuse* of the system. Which hardly works in the students favour.
He seems to misunderstand what a University is and is supposed to teach. Which is sad given that he works at one. Universities are about research and theory. Colleges are about the practical. This isn't about whether students are learning what they should be learning at Universities. It's about whether that student should be there in the first place.
Your replies rely on one thing: that there is enough time to consider the list. This is the ICU and that is a very bad assumption. Try again.
Regarding the air plane, your attempting to compare apples and oranges. The vast majority of the time, it isn't pilot error. But, rather that the techs on the ground didn't have time to go over there list, or budget restraints didn't allow them to fix something or many things, partially or totally. There is also an issue of competence.
Seriously. Let's use that brain filter before replying next time, ok?
Namely, being that once a check-list is created, after a while, one gets to the point where it's only the check-list that matters. Not on the check-list, doesn't happen. In other words, it allows people to get lazy and not pay attention. So, there will likely be errors produced from that negating the lives saved with nothing gained, but at the same time, a grand potential lose. The lose being a mentality of brainlessness in the ICU.
One must weight also weigh the practical consequences of such things that would have benefits against those benefits as well. We need to see a net gain first. Especially before widespread adoption.
I always love it when people say these things. Point of fact, we don't have enough data points to make this prediction. At best, that's a wild conjecture.
\begin{sarcasm} Yah, because it's not like PC games don't have DLC! \end{sarcasm}
Seriously, what isn't in development at the time a main game is in development. As in, it might not have been actively worked on, but the planning process would have probably been started. This is how things work (now). But, they certainly aren't going to announce anything before things are getting near finalization. Why? Because, people are inpatient and if the announcement of something like this isn't shortly before the actual release, then they'll get flack for it. Seriously, what announcement have you heard of that didn't go that way? Because, we all know what happened to Rockstar for its tragically long awaited DLC for GTA IV. Has that even come out yet?
As for DLC in general, people don't want to spend $60 on a game and that's it. Especially when it's for a console (no mods). The companies have figured a way to get new content to them, much (most?) of it free of charge, and this makes up for a lot of that. So, what's really the problem?
Quite frankly, I getting sick of this PC v.s. Console pissing contest. Why can't people just realise that both have there merits and some people will prefer one over the other. Why can't it be left at that? Why do people have to constantly jab at each other participating in flame wars over there OPINION of what they like better? We're adults. Why can't we act like that en mass?
You're cherry picking your data there (compilers, etc). To see what's out there, we must look at want is commonly done and if those things can benefit from parallel processing (and I see lots and lots of places, including the browser, where things could go parallel).
When we do that, we notice that what goes on in the gaming industry, soon becomes standard everywhere else. And both modern platforms, the PS3 and XBox 360 (I'm not including the Wii as Nintendo has different goals that having bleeding edge tech.) have multi-core processors. Radically different architectures, but multi-core none-the-less. We are also seeing this, and have been for a while, multi-core entering the desktop.
This isn't a coincidence. Moore's law has effectively ended for individual processors. Anything that might go against that is nothing more than a *very* short term dodging the inevitable. Multi-core is the only thing that is going to see our computers get faster. This does make it a software problem. And a problem it is.
Why? Because for the longest time threading has been available, but basically no-one has been teaching it nor developing better techniques to do it. So, we have grossly under experienced/under trained people out there that are now having to deal with the reality of the situation. This is going to cause some initial problems and lots of people are going to bitch about it. But, that is relatively short term.
The gaming industry will work out many of the problems and will share a lot of that information. Insomniac Games is a good example of this. But, there will still be growing pains. But, it shouldn't be perceived as anything else but growing pains.
Only the best modifications make it through? That's rather naive don't you think. It's more like the most agreed upon modifications make it through. And given the people that are creating such modifications, I hardly doubt they are in the peoples interest.
... walk over to the CS department and talk to the chair. Explain what you want and (s)he'll point you to the best person in the department to give you the answers you want, if it isn't him/her-self.
Seriously, why the hell would you ask here when you have far more reputable people a few steps away?
Actually, some things are impossible to view with the Forces view whereas the Energy view can model, as far as I know, everything. So, no, they aren't equally correct models. Just think about QM as an example if you think I'm wrong.
To your (1), and I know this is nitpicking, you're wrong. In maths courses, it is entirely NOT silly to discuss "algebra engineering." In fact, when actually discussing maths, it is a necessity when considering where things come from. In fact, I've seen courses on such things at Universities. The courses are typically disguised with names such as "Construction of the Number Systems" or similar. As in, you build the number systems and there properties. One of those properties being there algebraic properties. It's nice to know that things will always distribute, etc. But, I'll also mention that such things are taught in brief when studying other subjects. I've seen Fields in Modern Algebra as well as Analysis and Linear Algebra courses. It's necessary and wise to do these things when discussing proper maths.
Look at what you signed (or have to sign) for you to work there. If there is nothing, then they can't claim that you were informed of this and agreed to it as terms of your employment. Remember, a contract is something that BOTH parties agree on.
If they only paid (pay for) part of your salary, then it is arguable that they don't/can't own the entirety of the program. They'll have to argue with whoever else is paying your salary to see who gets what. I'm certain that NSERC will have an opinion on this.
But, as far as I know, it's not standard, when it comes to faculty, for the University to claim all (or any?) rights to what the "employee" produces. I don't know about students though. BUT, you can claim hypocrisy on there part if there is such a discontinuity between who gets what rights. As in, you were paid to do research and so what your supervisor. Why does (s)he get to hold on to IP and you don't? Isn't that a kind of Academic dishonesty? etc.
As for, what do you do. It's really up to you. Do you need this feather in your cap? Or is it a want that is not enough to push aside your feelings about giving up this IP? This is a personal decision that/. nor anywhere/anyone else can make for you.
So, stop trying to get others to make this decision for you. Stop, think about it, weigh the pros and cons and make it yourself. Then live with the consequences. It's called life. If you start doing it now, it'll make it a lot easier when you enter the real world.
I'm sick and tired of this racism, etc bullshit. It's like they see a "race" being put in a non-flattering light (which is actually relevant to them IRL), but because it's non-flattering, it's racist. Or if certain liberties have been taken, which is ok for *entertainment*, it's racism.
Gee, a slum in Africa. That's racist! Gee, an Asian with slanted eyes. That's racism! Gee, a *cartoon* of a woman with big breasts. That gives an unhealthy body image! etc. etc. etc.
It's all bullshit. Every *culture*/*gender*/etc has good and bad points in general. In fact, most comedy is based on these "stereotypes." But, that doesn't make them untrue. It just makes them unpopular in the eyes of a loud few. But, if history tells us anything, the politicians will bow to the loud few and over time, it'll become taboo to speak of it any more. Even though it's pretty much the truth.
For those that want an example, you just need to think of the term, mentally retarded. It is a very accurate term for the people in which it describes. But, because some people used it in a derogatory way (what wording can't be used that way?), it got "criminalised." And the people that did it were the activists, not even the parents of those in which it described.
It's a sad that this can happen. And all of it through emotional appeal. God forbid that logic and common sense would enter into it.
Definitely a chicken/egg problem. Another aspect of that is that the HR AND Techie people need to open there eyes and get there heads out of there asses i.e. arrogance is very bad here. Not every job requires the abilities that is found at Universities. And University graduates cost more (though perhaps not now).
Though, my thought on the "credit crunch" is that the people without a 4yr Degree will be lucky to find a job for the foreseeable future.
Well, I'll answer your question, but am still confused to your "answer" since it doesn't make sense given the question.
There are 1-2 yr diploma programs at (Technical) Colleges that teach such things. Though the 1 yr programs are typically not respected as the education that is typically given is sub-standard. Through a 2 yr program there is a chance. But, companies usually go for the better educated when they have a choice. And right now given the number of out of work degree people...
As in, although you might get out of the program faster, all that is learned to do is code. There is no real learning how things actually operate "behind the scenes." That sort of thinking is discouraged and answers not given.
Btw, I graduated from one of those Colleges before going on to complete a Math degree. I also looked into several Colleges, Technical or otherwise, when deciding where to go. So, I have first hand experience with them. Universities just give a better education even with the degradation in there curriculum.
That being said, if companies would actually know what they are looking for, the outlook would be vastely superior for those with just a College Diploma.
Quite frankly, I find the current state of affairs in education absurd. Universities are supposed to teach people to do theory, etc and prepare them to go on to a Masters, then Ph.D. for research purposes. Though there are some exceptions in things like Engineering. But, even then, there is a theoretical bend to those programs. Colleges or Community Colleges are for those 1-2 (atypically 3) year programs that are (almost) completely practical.
But, what is going on now, is that students, regardless of what they want to do, just go to University because "that's what you do after graduation." So, what's happening is that Universities, being run by a bunch of business people now, are forcing the departments to dumb everything down so these people pass in great numbers. Because, these business people erroneously view Universities as a service rather than the educational institution that they really are.
I really *really* hate "product" type thinking. Especially where it is completely wrong to apply.
You chose really *really* bad examples. As in, although Plumbers and Electricians don't need a/degree/ they *DO* need some piece of paper. Typically this is acquired through a (Community) College and typically includes some sort of work experience. This whole thing typically takes about 1 year. After this is done, then one goes on and works (i.e. apprenticeship). But, after a certain number of hours of work, one goes for another test and (I believe) more training (not long though). This is iterated a few times before one gets his/her Journeyman and they are then completely certified.
How do I know this? A buddy of mine I worked with (IT) decided to become a Plumber after he couldn't find work after the company we worked for basically folded. The above is what he went through and is still going through.
Slashdot Mirror
What about any of the BSDs? What about Haiku/BeOS? What about...
I mean, reading it, it is very accusatory, aggressive and rude. As a project founder, you don't have the luxury of doing something like this. That is, unless the tone of your project/general community, is such that this is acceptable. But, is that a tone that is really wanted?
It uses language as close to natural as I think a programming language can. It also forces proper indentation, which, as we all know, is very important for readability. It's also a scripting language that is very useful in RAD. All in all, it's a very good first language for those that don't want a C, hair pulling out, first experience. It also runs pretty much everywhere. Also, if you want to do graphics and/or games, there's Tkinter, PyOpenGL and PyGame.
Happy Hacking!
So much for the performance benefit.
Most (?) programmers have this thing about languages. They program in different ones until they find one they really *really* like. After that, EVERYTHING is about that language. Unfortunately, this is ridiculous.
Every language has its strengths and weaknesses. Every programmer has certain levels of competency with the different languages. Every project has its requirements.
In other words, pick the language that best meets the requirements of the project FIRST. THEN look at your competency in that language and come to the conclusion whether to proceed to the next best language, or use that one.
Btw, I once learned a language to do a project *while* *working* *in* *industry*. If you aren't able to do that, or don't want to do that, then this industry probably isn't as compatible with you as you think.
But, if you want my opinion based on my experience: learn as many languages as you can. The more languages you learn, the better you will be overall. You'll be surprised just how different you have to think in any given language to get the job done.
So, this student spams (according to the article) 391 University Profs. How is that not spam? Oh wait, it is. Also, there are ways of making such complaints; there are always committees to deal with such things. Attempting to circumvent that system by bulk email, is arguably unethical (not to mention profoundly stupid).
So, this really isn't about a student using there right of free speech, as the defence claims. It's about the *abuse* of the system. Which hardly works in the students favour.
He seems to misunderstand what a University is and is supposed to teach. Which is sad given that he works at one. Universities are about research and theory. Colleges are about the practical. This isn't about whether students are learning what they should be learning at Universities. It's about whether that student should be there in the first place.
Your replies rely on one thing: that there is enough time to consider the list. This is the ICU and that is a very bad assumption. Try again.
Regarding the air plane, your attempting to compare apples and oranges. The vast majority of the time, it isn't pilot error. But, rather that the techs on the ground didn't have time to go over there list, or budget restraints didn't allow them to fix something or many things, partially or totally. There is also an issue of competence.
Seriously. Let's use that brain filter before replying next time, ok?
Namely, being that once a check-list is created, after a while, one gets to the point where it's only the check-list that matters. Not on the check-list, doesn't happen. In other words, it allows people to get lazy and not pay attention. So, there will likely be errors produced from that negating the lives saved with nothing gained, but at the same time, a grand potential lose. The lose being a mentality of brainlessness in the ICU.
One must weight also weigh the practical consequences of such things that would have benefits against those benefits as well. We need to see a net gain first. Especially before widespread adoption.
I always love it when people say these things. Point of fact, we don't have enough data points to make this prediction. At best, that's a wild conjecture.
\begin{sarcasm}
Yah, because it's not like PC games don't have DLC!
\end{sarcasm}
Seriously, what isn't in development at the time a main game is in development. As in, it might not have been actively worked on, but the planning process would have probably been started. This is how things work (now). But, they certainly aren't going to announce anything before things are getting near finalization. Why? Because, people are inpatient and if the announcement of something like this isn't shortly before the actual release, then they'll get flack for it. Seriously, what announcement have you heard of that didn't go that way? Because, we all know what happened to Rockstar for its tragically long awaited DLC for GTA IV. Has that even come out yet?
As for DLC in general, people don't want to spend $60 on a game and that's it. Especially when it's for a console (no mods). The companies have figured a way to get new content to them, much (most?) of it free of charge, and this makes up for a lot of that. So, what's really the problem?
Quite frankly, I getting sick of this PC v.s. Console pissing contest. Why can't people just realise that both have there merits and some people will prefer one over the other. Why can't it be left at that? Why do people have to constantly jab at each other participating in flame wars over there OPINION of what they like better? We're adults. Why can't we act like that en mass?
I'm not sure if you're aware that you largely made my point for me.
You're cherry picking your data there (compilers, etc). To see what's out there, we must look at want is commonly done and if those things can benefit from parallel processing (and I see lots and lots of places, including the browser, where things could go parallel).
When we do that, we notice that what goes on in the gaming industry, soon becomes standard everywhere else. And both modern platforms, the PS3 and XBox 360 (I'm not including the Wii as Nintendo has different goals that having bleeding edge tech.) have multi-core processors. Radically different architectures, but multi-core none-the-less. We are also seeing this, and have been for a while, multi-core entering the desktop.
This isn't a coincidence. Moore's law has effectively ended for individual processors. Anything that might go against that is nothing more than a *very* short term dodging the inevitable. Multi-core is the only thing that is going to see our computers get faster. This does make it a software problem. And a problem it is.
Why? Because for the longest time threading has been available, but basically no-one has been teaching it nor developing better techniques to do it. So, we have grossly under experienced/under trained people out there that are now having to deal with the reality of the situation. This is going to cause some initial problems and lots of people are going to bitch about it. But, that is relatively short term.
The gaming industry will work out many of the problems and will share a lot of that information. Insomniac Games is a good example of this. But, there will still be growing pains. But, it shouldn't be perceived as anything else but growing pains.
Only the best modifications make it through? That's rather naive don't you think. It's more like the most agreed upon modifications make it through. And given the people that are creating such modifications, I hardly doubt they are in the peoples interest.
... walk over to the CS department and talk to the chair. Explain what you want and (s)he'll point you to the best person in the department to give you the answers you want, if it isn't him/her-self.
Seriously, why the hell would you ask here when you have far more reputable people a few steps away?
Actually, some things are impossible to view with the Forces view whereas the Energy view can model, as far as I know, everything. So, no, they aren't equally correct models. Just think about QM as an example if you think I'm wrong.
To your (1), and I know this is nitpicking, you're wrong. In maths courses, it is entirely NOT silly to discuss "algebra engineering." In fact, when actually discussing maths, it is a necessity when considering where things come from. In fact, I've seen courses on such things at Universities. The courses are typically disguised with names such as "Construction of the Number Systems" or similar. As in, you build the number systems and there properties. One of those properties being there algebraic properties. It's nice to know that things will always distribute, etc. But, I'll also mention that such things are taught in brief when studying other subjects. I've seen Fields in Modern Algebra as well as Analysis and Linear Algebra courses. It's necessary and wise to do these things when discussing proper maths.
Look at what you signed (or have to sign) for you to work there. If there is nothing, then they can't claim that you were informed of this and agreed to it as terms of your employment. Remember, a contract is something that BOTH parties agree on.
If they only paid (pay for) part of your salary, then it is arguable that they don't/can't own the entirety of the program. They'll have to argue with whoever else is paying your salary to see who gets what. I'm certain that NSERC will have an opinion on this.
But, as far as I know, it's not standard, when it comes to faculty, for the University to claim all (or any?) rights to what the "employee" produces. I don't know about students though. BUT, you can claim hypocrisy on there part if there is such a discontinuity between who gets what rights. As in, you were paid to do research and so what your supervisor. Why does (s)he get to hold on to IP and you don't? Isn't that a kind of Academic dishonesty? etc.
As for, what do you do. It's really up to you. Do you need this feather in your cap? Or is it a want that is not enough to push aside your feelings about giving up this IP? This is a personal decision that /. nor anywhere/anyone else can make for you.
So, stop trying to get others to make this decision for you. Stop, think about it, weigh the pros and cons and make it yourself. Then live with the consequences. It's called life. If you start doing it now, it'll make it a lot easier when you enter the real world.
I'm sick and tired of this racism, etc bullshit. It's like they see a "race" being put in a non-flattering light (which is actually relevant to them IRL), but because it's non-flattering, it's racist. Or if certain liberties have been taken, which is ok for *entertainment*, it's racism.
Gee, a slum in Africa. That's racist! Gee, an Asian with slanted eyes. That's racism! Gee, a *cartoon* of a woman with big breasts. That gives an unhealthy body image! etc. etc. etc.
It's all bullshit. Every *culture*/*gender*/etc has good and bad points in general. In fact, most comedy is based on these "stereotypes." But, that doesn't make them untrue. It just makes them unpopular in the eyes of a loud few. But, if history tells us anything, the politicians will bow to the loud few and over time, it'll become taboo to speak of it any more. Even though it's pretty much the truth.
For those that want an example, you just need to think of the term, mentally retarded. It is a very accurate term for the people in which it describes. But, because some people used it in a derogatory way (what wording can't be used that way?), it got "criminalised." And the people that did it were the activists, not even the parents of those in which it described.
It's a sad that this can happen. And all of it through emotional appeal. God forbid that logic and common sense would enter into it.
How many times do people have to get this wrong before it sinks in?
Please release it for the PS3. PLEASE!!!
Definitely a chicken/egg problem. Another aspect of that is that the HR AND Techie people need to open there eyes and get there heads out of there asses i.e. arrogance is very bad here. Not every job requires the abilities that is found at Universities. And University graduates cost more (though perhaps not now).
Though, my thought on the "credit crunch" is that the people without a 4yr Degree will be lucky to find a job for the foreseeable future.
Well, I'll answer your question, but am still confused to your "answer" since it doesn't make sense given the question.
There are 1-2 yr diploma programs at (Technical) Colleges that teach such things. Though the 1 yr programs are typically not respected as the education that is typically given is sub-standard. Through a 2 yr program there is a chance. But, companies usually go for the better educated when they have a choice. And right now given the number of out of work degree people...
As in, although you might get out of the program faster, all that is learned to do is code. There is no real learning how things actually operate "behind the scenes." That sort of thinking is discouraged and answers not given.
Btw, I graduated from one of those Colleges before going on to complete a Math degree. I also looked into several Colleges, Technical or otherwise, when deciding where to go. So, I have first hand experience with them. Universities just give a better education even with the degradation in there curriculum.
That being said, if companies would actually know what they are looking for, the outlook would be vastely superior for those with just a College Diploma.
That is why there are 2 year Diploma programs.
Quite frankly, I find the current state of affairs in education absurd. Universities are supposed to teach people to do theory, etc and prepare them to go on to a Masters, then Ph.D. for research purposes. Though there are some exceptions in things like Engineering. But, even then, there is a theoretical bend to those programs. Colleges or Community Colleges are for those 1-2 (atypically 3) year programs that are (almost) completely practical.
But, what is going on now, is that students, regardless of what they want to do, just go to University because "that's what you do after graduation." So, what's happening is that Universities, being run by a bunch of business people now, are forcing the departments to dumb everything down so these people pass in great numbers. Because, these business people erroneously view Universities as a service rather than the educational institution that they really are.
I really *really* hate "product" type thinking. Especially where it is completely wrong to apply.
You chose really *really* bad examples. As in, although Plumbers and Electricians don't need a /degree/ they *DO* need some piece of paper. Typically this is acquired through a (Community) College and typically includes some sort of work experience. This whole thing typically takes about 1 year. After this is done, then one goes on and works (i.e. apprenticeship). But, after a certain number of hours of work, one goes for another test and (I believe) more training (not long though). This is iterated a few times before one gets his/her Journeyman and they are then completely certified.
How do I know this? A buddy of mine I worked with (IT) decided to become a Plumber after he couldn't find work after the company we worked for basically folded. The above is what he went through and is still going through.