I'm sure that the space program has provided a number of valuable technological advances. If you spend billions of dollars annually on highly-paid engineers, you're going to get something more practical than credit default swaps or essays on the effect of "I Love Lucy" on the role of women.
However, if you took all that money that was given to NASA and spent it on engineers who were required to make something that someone was willing to buy, would you have a lot more practical stuff than you have from NASA?
Honestly, I don't know the answer. There is something to be said be for being in a research environment without constant quarterly P & L statements. I only know one guy who worked at NASA. He referred to it as the "Sleep Factory."
This idea that cutting social security benefits by $5/month is justification is insane. That's the logic that got us into a $10 trillion hole. I'm not going to tell some old lady living on social security that she needs to give up lunch one more time per month than she already does so we nerds can have our big rocket ships. Think how we feel when the jocks take our $5/month so they can have their football stadiums.
It is not a "tax" because it pays for something that is useless, it is a tax because it is a mandatory payment for something that should be optional. I am agnostic on the MS/Linux debate, but I'm definitely against the idea of making everyone pay for something that can easily be turned into an optional add-on. Personally, I like having a mouse with my laptop, but I don't think it should be a mandatory purchase for others.
Dave... (from my dual-boot laptop which usually boots to Ubuntu, but occasionally needs an MS app like TurboTax or Finale.)
I would do it a different way. If the iPod is plugged into an AUTHORIZED computer, but is expected to play crappy music like that, it disables itself. Sometimes, we have to use technology to save people from themselves.
Exactly. I still use a Palm Vx (vintage 1997 or so). It's small. It works. I use it constantly and I charge it once a month or so. When I go on the road, I don't bring a charger. I don't want my calendar and entire phone book, etc. in my phone becuase I want to have the simplest possible access to that stuff when I am on the phone. When my phone dies, I'm not totally SOL. The beauty of PalmOS is that it does the basic tasks really well, probably because it doesn't care about more complicated things.
The complaint that Palm drops it's support when new models come out is irrelevant. You can get these things on eBay for about $40 and you can always get new accessories on the cheap. There are even guys who have Palm repair business on eBay. People are always bidding against me, so I guess people still use the things. I know one of my co-workers has the same model that I do.
I'm not really that familiar with WM, but I have written some experimental stuff for PalmOS. It is not the most refined toolset or API, but compared to writing embedded code, which I do all day, it's fine.
This is basically a brainstorm. I am not a security expert, so flames are not going to make me feel bad.
How much does all this security cost per person? Would it be cheaper just to put US Marshalls on every flight and take our chances?
I think people who really understand this stuff all agree that air travel is basically indefensible by airport security. Airport security had nothing to do with foiling this plot in the UK.
I'm not sure I wouldn't be happier just getting on the damn plane with no security and sit next to a guy with towel on his head, a Gatorade in one hand, and a remote control in the other knowing that all the money that used to be wasted on security and security research was spent on intellegence and on-board security.
If we are going to go the security route, it seems like a tiered approach might help. For example, you check your suitcases in the terminal, but your laptop case (with your medicine) gets checked in the gate area and goes in a smaller high-priority luggage area, perhaps where the back row of seats used to be. Really, 150 laptop bags don't take that much space. This would eliminate the likelihood of damage. Airlines would probably do better by maintaining passengers.
People who need medicine on-board could get approval when they book the ticket. The medicine could even be provided by an in-airport pharmacy and delivered directly to the gate agents. It would be given to them as they pre-board. Essentially, they would be making the type of arrangements people with disabilities do all the time.
In reality, I don't know why we and the terrorists are so obcessed with air travel. It seems like there many easier venues for creating mass death. For example... a Big 10 football game. Every Saturday, enough liquids are smuggled into those stadiums to take out the entire crowd.
I agree and I think this is a great point for many. (But, I am 32, have 8 years in the industry, and don't claim to know everything by a long shot.)
For most of us, the tech career is going to be an uphill climb. It seems like the market for older, technical, indivual contributors is going to be very limited. And if you are let go, it will be hard to find companies looking to match your old salary.
But for those for whom IT/CompSci is a passion and an incredible gift there will always be work. The best in virtually any field (music, politics, mountain climbing, sports) will always be valued and find a way to pay the rent related to their interest. But for most of us in CompSci, the reality is the competition is going to be fierce. (Personally, I got out of being a professional musician because the competition for the best work is so intense. This is starting to be no different.)
Being an "individual contributor" in a tech firm has a limited salary growth curve and it is unlikely that any of us are going to retire at 35 with hyper-inflated stock options. So, to those of you starting out in this field, I suggest realizing that the initial salary is good, but unless you fall into one of a few special categories, forego the Mustang and buy something to generate passive income before you get hooked on an expensive lifestyle. If you are single, you should be able to save quite a bit in the first years of your career. Perhaps, then you will be able to switch to something less lucrative and supplement your new salary with some type of other income.
People this might not apply to:
- You are phenomenally talented and passionate about programming. It is in your soul. If you were out of work, people would come calling because of your track record in the industry or on open-source projects. You're practically famous and you are well-liked by almost everyone who has ever worked with you.
- You are the kind of person likely to move into management because you are sharp, you have that desire and you have that skill set. You will be managing people and relying on your technical ability. When layoffs hit, you'll be in the meeting picking who stays.
- You have technical skills, but you're best suited for marketing/sales side of things where you won't really be competiting technically and you will be able to thrive on these other skills.
- You are talented and have a good entreprenurial sense. Your first 2-10 years are simply to learn the corporate ropes before you start your own business.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure that the space program has provided a number of valuable technological advances. If you spend billions of dollars annually on highly-paid engineers, you're going to get something more practical than credit default swaps or essays on the effect of "I Love Lucy" on the role of women.
However, if you took all that money that was given to NASA and spent it on engineers who were required to make something that someone was willing to buy, would you have a lot more practical stuff than you have from NASA?
Honestly, I don't know the answer. There is something to be said be for being in a research environment without constant quarterly P & L statements. I only know one guy who worked at NASA. He referred to it as the "Sleep Factory."
This idea that cutting social security benefits by $5/month is justification is insane. That's the logic that got us into a $10 trillion hole. I'm not going to tell some old lady living on social security that she needs to give up lunch one more time per month than she already does so we nerds can have our big rocket ships. Think how we feel when the jocks take our $5/month so they can have their football stadiums.
It is not a "tax" because it pays for something that is useless, it is a tax because it is a mandatory payment for something that should be optional. I am agnostic on the MS/Linux debate, but I'm definitely against the idea of making everyone pay for something that can easily be turned into an optional add-on. Personally, I like having a mouse with my laptop, but I don't think it should be a mandatory purchase for others.
...
Dave
(from my dual-boot laptop which usually boots to Ubuntu, but occasionally needs an MS app like TurboTax or Finale.)
I would do it a different way. If the iPod is plugged into an AUTHORIZED computer, but is expected to play crappy music like that, it disables itself. Sometimes, we have to use technology to save people from themselves.
Exactly. I still use a Palm Vx (vintage 1997 or so). It's small. It works. I use it constantly and I charge it once a month or so. When I go on the road, I don't bring a charger. I don't want my calendar and entire phone book, etc. in my phone becuase I want to have the simplest possible access to that stuff when I am on the phone. When my phone dies, I'm not totally SOL. The beauty of PalmOS is that it does the basic tasks really well, probably because it doesn't care about more complicated things.
The complaint that Palm drops it's support when new models come out is irrelevant. You can get these things on eBay for about $40 and you can always get new accessories on the cheap. There are even guys who have Palm repair business on eBay. People are always bidding against me, so I guess people still use the things. I know one of my co-workers has the same model that I do.
I'm not really that familiar with WM, but I have written some experimental stuff for PalmOS. It is not the most refined toolset or API, but compared to writing embedded code, which I do all day, it's fine.
flooey, will you please run for president?
OK. My bad. Let's say "sitting next to a guy wearing an Al Qaeda sweatshirt holding a Gatorade and an iPod."
How much does all this security cost per person? Would it be cheaper just to put US Marshalls on every flight and take our chances?
I think people who really understand this stuff all agree that air travel is basically indefensible by airport security. Airport security had nothing to do with foiling this plot in the UK.
I'm not sure I wouldn't be happier just getting on the damn plane with no security and sit next to a guy with towel on his head, a Gatorade in one hand, and a remote control in the other knowing that all the money that used to be wasted on security and security research was spent on intellegence and on-board security.
If we are going to go the security route, it seems like a tiered approach might help. For example, you check your suitcases in the terminal, but your laptop case (with your medicine) gets checked in the gate area and goes in a smaller high-priority luggage area, perhaps where the back row of seats used to be. Really, 150 laptop bags don't take that much space. This would eliminate the likelihood of damage. Airlines would probably do better by maintaining passengers.
People who need medicine on-board could get approval when they book the ticket. The medicine could even be provided by an in-airport pharmacy and delivered directly to the gate agents. It would be given to them as they pre-board. Essentially, they would be making the type of arrangements people with disabilities do all the time.
In reality, I don't know why we and the terrorists are so obcessed with air travel. It seems like there many easier venues for creating mass death. For example ... a Big 10 football game. Every Saturday, enough liquids are smuggled into those stadiums to take out the entire crowd.
I agree and I think this is a great point for many. (But, I am 32, have 8 years in the industry, and don't claim to know everything by a long shot.) For most of us, the tech career is going to be an uphill climb. It seems like the market for older, technical, indivual contributors is going to be very limited. And if you are let go, it will be hard to find companies looking to match your old salary. But for those for whom IT/CompSci is a passion and an incredible gift there will always be work. The best in virtually any field (music, politics, mountain climbing, sports) will always be valued and find a way to pay the rent related to their interest. But for most of us in CompSci, the reality is the competition is going to be fierce. (Personally, I got out of being a professional musician because the competition for the best work is so intense. This is starting to be no different.) Being an "individual contributor" in a tech firm has a limited salary growth curve and it is unlikely that any of us are going to retire at 35 with hyper-inflated stock options. So, to those of you starting out in this field, I suggest realizing that the initial salary is good, but unless you fall into one of a few special categories, forego the Mustang and buy something to generate passive income before you get hooked on an expensive lifestyle. If you are single, you should be able to save quite a bit in the first years of your career. Perhaps, then you will be able to switch to something less lucrative and supplement your new salary with some type of other income. People this might not apply to: - You are phenomenally talented and passionate about programming. It is in your soul. If you were out of work, people would come calling because of your track record in the industry or on open-source projects. You're practically famous and you are well-liked by almost everyone who has ever worked with you. - You are the kind of person likely to move into management because you are sharp, you have that desire and you have that skill set. You will be managing people and relying on your technical ability. When layoffs hit, you'll be in the meeting picking who stays. - You have technical skills, but you're best suited for marketing/sales side of things where you won't really be competiting technically and you will be able to thrive on these other skills. - You are talented and have a good entreprenurial sense. Your first 2-10 years are simply to learn the corporate ropes before you start your own business.