I've got a theory, it could be witches, some evil witches, which is ridiculous because Wicca good and love the earth and woman power and I'll be other there. Dear fucking Lord. Granny Weatherwax created a planet!
Teenagers, despite occasionally lacking all other intellectual faculties, always know when an adult tries to deceive them.
Rather than telling kids that math is "cool", we should tell them the truth: that math is the difficult yet incredibly fascinating process of rigorous (usually quantitative) reasoning, and that it can yield interesting and useful results if learned and applied correctly. Even the teens who still hate math will at least respect the adults that told the truth about it.
It varies dramatically by city and neighborhood. Tel Aviv has newsstands with hardcore porn (though they age-limit buying it), while Jerusalem would probably never allow such a thing (due to its high concentration of religious Jews). For Haifa and Be'er Sheva I'd have to look up their demographics to predict their relevant laws.
Perhaps you should move to Iran or Israel when you don't have these highly offensive content! You mean the Israel where you can get hardcore pornography at newsstands?
So you really don't care about one of the most important pieces of literature ever written (and note that in the original Hebrew it's actually well written)?
Wow, something just set off my Angry Atheist Who Used to be Christian alarm.
But now you've made my point for me. The Japanese make marketing for the Japanese. Americans can't (nor can anyone else) make themselves the world's advertising agency.
Of course there's competitive pressure, damnit! My point is that the competition has no particular reason to favor any one physical location.
Take for example Steve Jobs. He's a design and marketing genius! But it's only his luck of a separate market that keeps him out of competition with the people who designed and marketed the Nintendo Wii, not his American citizenship.
If tiered pricing goes into effect on a broad scale, liberal arts degrees will be further devalued relative to engineering or business degrees in the eyes of potential employers. Companies will start turning their noses up at anything they don't perceive as being a "serious" Bachelor's Degree. So you mean that the recent degree inflation will at least partially reverse itself?
But I don't think so. Employers know that an expensive degree doesn't confer more credit than a cheap one from the same school just by having been expensive. However, less people able to get engineering degrees will mean less young engineers, which will mean higher salaries for the engineers who are in the job market.
Maybe we now see engineering becoming a profession like medicine and law?
I think it stems more from the fact that a lot of liberal arts majors simply don't have clear definitions. What the fuck does it mean to major in Communications or Media Studies? Sociology?
But mainly it's just about work. Science and engineering majors work harder, party less and get bitter about it.
One of the actual justified reasons for the prejudice lies in the number of required credits to each major. Vague and "liberal-artsy" majors tend to have 60 required credits (not counting general education courses) or even less out of 120 credits to a bachelor's degree, while sciences and engineering tend to require 80-120 credits depending on the school (at mine Computer Science is a 90-credit major, for example) and the amount of required general education classes (you guessed it, we spend all of those 30 spare credits on general education).
Technical curricula also tend to carry more credit-hours per course, meaning that each course includes more or harder work. Where I attend uni, the standard mathematical, scientific (for majors), engineering, or computer science course has 4 credit hours, while the average course outside those categories has 3. And our Comp. Sci. curriculum has only as many core courses as any other major, but so many have 4 credits that it adds up to a 90-credit major.
So in at least two numerically measurable ways, engineering and science students do actually work harder than liberal-arts or "basket weaving" students. We choose those majors, so we really have no excuse to feel bitter about our workload. But then again, I can use the 30 credits of required gen-ed to take fun classes, inflate my GPA, or meet girls. John Q. Mathnerd at MIT can't do that.
Unfortunately, anybody can make their own advertising and pop-culture. The barrier to entry isn't even nothing, it's negative! Any free market economy eventually creates an advertising sector and any First World, capitalist culture eventually produces commercial popular culture.
So why should other nations buy their ads and "cool" clothing brands from America when they can make them at home?
In contrast, it has taken decades for other countries to match us in engineering. It would have taken even longer if we hadn't begun sliding downwards at some point.
I think the problem is mostly limited to overpriced private schools. Think about it:
1) The kid must meet pretentious, sky-high academic standards simply to gain admission to the college. 2) The college charges not merely an arm and a leg, but both arms and a leg. Unless the kid is a tippity-top student (or has skin of the right color), they don't offer any scholarships. 3) So the kid and their parents have to take out student loans, which charge the remaining limb in interest. 4) Now the kid works their way through university, never actually getting much teaching from the pretentious faculty of the college's acclaimed X Studies department. 5) Around the end of junior year, the kid realizes that those louts at the first-rate state university a couple towns over are actually receiving a better education for less money. Note: This does not apply to truly tier-one private universities such as Cornell, Stanford, or MIT. It primarily applies to expensive, prestigious-by-being-pretentious private liberal-arts colleges. 6) The kid graduates. The top students in his/her class (at a first-rate university) received an astounding education. The average ones, like the kid, got an OK education. Everyone is drowning in debt.
If you can see your life following that set of steps, you would also feel damn well entitled to a job that will help you pay off your loans and then some. And investment banking and whatnot tends to provide that kind of money, so the kids feel entitled to investment banking.
Now, of course, seeing that path up ahead and still following it pretty well marks you as an idiot. But somehow I don't want to blame "idiotic" young people for being, statistically, the financially worst-off generation of young people in a long time, in no small part thanks to high college tuitions coupled with "financial aid" that comes only as loans.
So young people are fucked. And it makes them feel entitled to un-fuck themselves.
Someone says this every single time a college raises tuition, cuts subsidies or requires more work in a "desirable" (to Slashdot nerds) subject like engineering, physics, or computer science. The increments add up until suddenly a brilliant young mathematician can't afford his senior year of undergrad they raised tuition by 10%, incremented student loan interest rates by 3% and cut merit scholarship by 50%. At some point you have to say "Enough is enough! I have had it with these motherfucking increments at this motherfucking school!"
So stop going on about how a truly dedicated Math major will go into just a little, eensy weensy bit more debt to graduate, and start asking yourself when that little bit more becomes too much.
This is open source. If the mainline kernel only contains "specialized" schedulers for some reason, Linus or somebody else will add back general-purpose schedulers. And if the users don't select those, the problem belongs to them.
3/4 of fans really identify with Harry? That shows more that Rowling can characterize very sympathetically than that people are all as stupid as Harry. In fact, most fans I met at the release party (including myself) had worked out things that later turned out true based on the first 6 books (more than Harry can accomplish on his own), and those whose guesses were all wrong still made very educated guesses.
Slashdot Mirror
Teenagers, despite occasionally lacking all other intellectual faculties, always know when an adult tries to deceive them.
Rather than telling kids that math is "cool", we should tell them the truth: that math is the difficult yet incredibly fascinating process of rigorous (usually quantitative) reasoning, and that it can yield interesting and useful results if learned and applied correctly. Even the teens who still hate math will at least respect the adults that told the truth about it.
It varies dramatically by city and neighborhood. Tel Aviv has newsstands with hardcore porn (though they age-limit buying it), while Jerusalem would probably never allow such a thing (due to its high concentration of religious Jews). For Haifa and Be'er Sheva I'd have to look up their demographics to predict their relevant laws.
And Now You Know!
They tried that in a movie once.
So you really don't care about one of the most important pieces of literature ever written (and note that in the original Hebrew it's actually well written)?
Wow, something just set off my Angry Atheist Who Used to be Christian alarm.
But you do know what that verse actually refers to, don't you?
Aldous Huxley, you unfuckable clod.
But now you've made my point for me. The Japanese make marketing for the Japanese. Americans can't (nor can anyone else) make themselves the world's advertising agency.
Of course there's competitive pressure, damnit! My point is that the competition has no particular reason to favor any one physical location.
Take for example Steve Jobs. He's a design and marketing genius! But it's only his luck of a separate market that keeps him out of competition with the people who designed and marketed the Nintendo Wii, not his American citizenship.
Mashiach actually arrives! Jews to build Third Temple! Dead to rise!
But I don't think so. Employers know that an expensive degree doesn't confer more credit than a cheap one from the same school just by having been expensive. However, less people able to get engineering degrees will mean less young engineers, which will mean higher salaries for the engineers who are in the job market.
Maybe we now see engineering becoming a profession like medicine and law?
I think it stems more from the fact that a lot of liberal arts majors simply don't have clear definitions. What the fuck does it mean to major in Communications or Media Studies? Sociology?
But mainly it's just about work. Science and engineering majors work harder, party less and get bitter about it.
One of the actual justified reasons for the prejudice lies in the number of required credits to each major. Vague and "liberal-artsy" majors tend to have 60 required credits (not counting general education courses) or even less out of 120 credits to a bachelor's degree, while sciences and engineering tend to require 80-120 credits depending on the school (at mine Computer Science is a 90-credit major, for example) and the amount of required general education classes (you guessed it, we spend all of those 30 spare credits on general education).
Technical curricula also tend to carry more credit-hours per course, meaning that each course includes more or harder work. Where I attend uni, the standard mathematical, scientific (for majors), engineering, or computer science course has 4 credit hours, while the average course outside those categories has 3. And our Comp. Sci. curriculum has only as many core courses as any other major, but so many have 4 credits that it adds up to a 90-credit major.
So in at least two numerically measurable ways, engineering and science students do actually work harder than liberal-arts or "basket weaving" students. We choose those majors, so we really have no excuse to feel bitter about our workload. But then again, I can use the 30 credits of required gen-ed to take fun classes, inflate my GPA, or meet girls. John Q. Mathnerd at MIT can't do that.
Unfortunately, anybody can make their own advertising and pop-culture. The barrier to entry isn't even nothing, it's negative! Any free market economy eventually creates an advertising sector and any First World, capitalist culture eventually produces commercial popular culture.
So why should other nations buy their ads and "cool" clothing brands from America when they can make them at home?
In contrast, it has taken decades for other countries to match us in engineering. It would have taken even longer if we hadn't begun sliding downwards at some point.
Yeah, but the GP's a professor. He was measuring how many students he had to teach, not how many made it to upper-level courses.
I think the problem is mostly limited to overpriced private schools. Think about it:
1) The kid must meet pretentious, sky-high academic standards simply to gain admission to the college.
2) The college charges not merely an arm and a leg, but both arms and a leg. Unless the kid is a tippity-top student (or has skin of the right color), they don't offer any scholarships.
3) So the kid and their parents have to take out student loans, which charge the remaining limb in interest.
4) Now the kid works their way through university, never actually getting much teaching from the pretentious faculty of the college's acclaimed X Studies department.
5) Around the end of junior year, the kid realizes that those louts at the first-rate state university a couple towns over are actually receiving a better education for less money. Note: This does not apply to truly tier-one private universities such as Cornell, Stanford, or MIT. It primarily applies to expensive, prestigious-by-being-pretentious private liberal-arts colleges.
6) The kid graduates. The top students in his/her class (at a first-rate university) received an astounding education. The average ones, like the kid, got an OK education. Everyone is drowning in debt.
If you can see your life following that set of steps, you would also feel damn well entitled to a job that will help you pay off your loans and then some. And investment banking and whatnot tends to provide that kind of money, so the kids feel entitled to investment banking.
Now, of course, seeing that path up ahead and still following it pretty well marks you as an idiot. But somehow I don't want to blame "idiotic" young people for being, statistically, the financially worst-off generation of young people in a long time, in no small part thanks to high college tuitions coupled with "financial aid" that comes only as loans.
So young people are fucked. And it makes them feel entitled to un-fuck themselves.
Someone says this every single time a college raises tuition, cuts subsidies or requires more work in a "desirable" (to Slashdot nerds) subject like engineering, physics, or computer science. The increments add up until suddenly a brilliant young mathematician can't afford his senior year of undergrad they raised tuition by 10%, incremented student loan interest rates by 3% and cut merit scholarship by 50%. At some point you have to say "Enough is enough! I have had it with these motherfucking increments at this motherfucking school!"
So stop going on about how a truly dedicated Math major will go into just a little, eensy weensy bit more debt to graduate, and start asking yourself when that little bit more becomes too much.
So governments should have no power over state universities? Weee! Let's privatize the Capitol now!
This is open source. If the mainline kernel only contains "specialized" schedulers for some reason, Linus or somebody else will add back general-purpose schedulers. And if the users don't select those, the problem belongs to them.
Yeah, but in your day we got Nights into Dreams instead of Madden Football 2007.
Why do you find the two statements for some reason irreconcilable?
Then explain Xenophelius Lovegood from Book 7.
What kind of Catholic knows the term "alter cocker"?
3/4 of fans really identify with Harry? That shows more that Rowling can characterize very sympathetically than that people are all as stupid as Harry. In fact, most fans I met at the release party (including myself) had worked out things that later turned out true based on the first 6 books (more than Harry can accomplish on his own), and those whose guesses were all wrong still made very educated guesses.
Because its practitioners have lots of money and friends in high places. Sound familiar?