How about a chat/video/voice client that has a real p2p component. I only know of one on the market and it's Zyptonite. Unfortunately the clients are closed source.
Pleiades is just a slurm cluster. You can deploy new hardware, push your processes to be queued to the new hardware and link your run time to use cuda enabled libraries no problem.
Switching link time and link time hooks is pretty easy on Pleiades. It's the same way you would switch between python versions, different fortran run times (intel and gnu), different mpi runtimes (openmpi/sgi enabled stuff).
Source: worked on Advanced Vehicle Make and had to run cfd code on Pleiades.
If you get a low end commercial account for cable/adsl/pon/fiber, you can rent a range from your isp for 5-6 bucks a usable address. I rent a/29 for 30 added on to my pon bill.
Well, I think they are not the same thing. That's like going to a math conference and get disappointed that they don't hand out research awards for results found in mechanical engineering papers
Let's talk about two bodies of work that ought to be about the same type of people, but actually yield very different results. Let's compare James Salter's first two books, The Hunters and Cassada with The Expanse series.
James Salter's first two books draws from his experience as a late joiner to the American Army Aircorps, of which he graduated in 1945. The first book, Hunters, draws from his experience as a fighter pilot in the Korean War. It's about a guy who really wants to be successful as a fighter pilot. Throughout the book, while I the reader is constantly rooting for him, he is awash in self doubt. I don't think my efforts for rooting for him are in vain, but the character took awile for me to get to liking. Cassada on the other hand is about a guy who I imediately draw a liking to, but his charm does not extend to many of his cohorts within the book. I'm often surprised by what happens, how my heart strings get tugged with and it almost seems like disappointment hits both the characters and me in waves where I would least expect it.
But I read the Expanse series, and immediately the tropes jump out. As a novel where one co-author did the world building for an MMO game first, and then play tested it using D20 modern characters, the mechanics of this world seemed pre-ordained, the characters already seemed like they were a bit more sure of themselves and the people writing/playing them had a good idea on how they were going to react given a circumstance, as role player tend to have a habit of playing slightly different takes on the same theme most of the time. I open this book and come to feelings of simulteously being somewhere new, and having been there before, all at once. I remember a pair of adidas that I really liked playing basketball in when I was in my teens and in my late 20s it was re-released. The shoe felt similar, but better constructed. The Expanse feels no different.
Literary fiction toys with the literary fiction making process whilst in the guise of putting together a tale. The reader here does the work of deconstructing the process. The literary protaganist may be the center of the plot, but he/she/it isn't really driving it. Most of the time they aren't even all that likable in the beginning. I read literary fiction and examine how and why things are done while I anticipate what happens from page to page.
In commercial fiction, the main characters do most of the work for the reader. There's less playing around in style. Characters that drive the book are immediately likable. I don't really have to wonder about the why or the how. Most commercial fiction borrow important techniques from literary fiction from years past, and some sci fi writers read their literary fiction contemporaries (it's obvious that Neal Stephenson borrows from David Foster Wallace). So if I pay attention and keep up with my literary world stuff, the sci fi stuff will use dramatic techniques and plot devices that trickle down.
I've got an older GTX 760 running on an HP Z820. I run ubuntu on this thing and use nvidia-352 drivers. When I log out of gnome3 and log back in through lightdm, I see the same exact symptoms. I can see what was previously displayed on my framebuffer, including firefox and chromium windows.
Well, a great deal about surviving as an adult is having the right answers and having a job. A large majority of students produced by an education system will not only remember facts taught, but at least be able to regurgitate the official explanation as to why these facts occurred, as well as a few token methods of deconstruction. Those that want to understand more about their subjects at school would be capable of understanding how the education system.
A large part of working in the US is being trained for a vocation, where the particular parts of the vocation are neither interesting nor necessarily logical, but the skillset fits together and rote memorization leading to mastery. It is important for a linux sys admin to understand how a mail server interacts with the kernel by way of syscalls, but while it is nice, it's not really necessary to understand the fundamental
Your 'reasoning' was hardly reasonable. The statement 'Frankly, I find the notion that you can hand out one-size-fits-all standardized tests to everyone and quantify people's understanding of the material to be utterly absurd, and frankly, harmful.' is a poorly researched opinion. My statement of similarly worded tests for calc 1,2,3, as is evident as anyone who has taken these classes, as well as the very minor editorial changes that have occurred since between older text books in print vis a vis current text books, as anyone who owns multiple copies of calc 1,2,3 textbooks, knows that the material in these classes haven't changed despite some of these books were printed before standardized testing became popular, and some of them after. The curriculum has been standardized, the testing of this curriculum has been standardized, at least for these three subjects at the university level, without the presence of a standards committee. But it has effectively annealed.
I think the biggest issue here is that culturally, there is a distrust of education authorities in this country overall, and specifically that a test on paper has a difficult time simulating actual problem solving needs. America is not a country that has a culture that prizes intellect. But fortunately, it's not a belief that is shared by many other western and far east countries.
The benefit increasing test scores by approaching the problem a different way seems inconsequential to some because those are largely of the opinion that tests don't matter in the first place. The fact is that book learning is very well correlated to the performance on a test, and if nationally or at least within a school district, we agree on a curriculum to teach, then a paper test that is standardized properly should work very well for that curriculum.
Because a large part of professional success comes from recognizing an encountered problem is similar to a previously problem, and one only has to change a few things to apply known methods to the 'new' problem. You need rote memorization to remember previous problems and their associated methods, you need pattern recognition to see that different problems may actually have a similar structure.
Frankly, testing everyone the same way, based on a standard syllabus on how material ought to be taught, limits a) the scope of the inquiry and b) the variance of the starting conditions of the student. The tests only measure the ability of students to solve problems, where the methods to arrive at proper solutions are what is taught in the course. There are only so many ways to write a calculus one, two, three test, and this is freshmen and sophomore college mathematics for engineers. A cursory examination of finals of the last 15 years by of those classes listed from the different department consists of similarly worded problems and types of questions. I can buy a 30 year old schaums that gives me practice problems that will prepare me well for a final in those classes. And quite quickly, one can look at the answers a student has submitted and know if the student has a clue of what is going on.
And before you argue that Algebra 1/2 are different courses than a college calculus course, do realize that the scope of the inquiry within high school classes are much more limited.
The scope of the material hasn't changed much over the years, the problems of testing the students haven't changed much either, why the resistance of standardized tests? It works well enough.
The issue here is that most infrastructure improvements of a university are paid for by the state and/or the alumni. Other sorts of funding include NSF/DARPA/etc where a large percentage of the money comes in is chopped up. If you are a heavy R&D shop, even if you are part of a private school, the US government pays for a large chunk of your engineering, science and even a bit of your math department. However you trickle it down, this government funding will affect the scholastic experience of all students, including foreign ones that pay out of state or private tuition.
Most university policies demand that a professor cannot take a cut from selling his own work for his classes. It's a pretty big deal.
Most of the time it is because he boot strapped his lesson plan from ground up and didn't really want to change it around with what the text books are offering. As far as I understand it, it's mostly a labor of love.
If you live at or near a college town, go to the math department itself. See if they have a preferred tutors list. Pick 3 names off the list, generally the senior the better.
Write each of them an email, explaining to them your particular quandry. Let them know what statistics/math course you want to take to graduate. Ask them about the pre-reqs and what you have to know from them. Let them know you will be looking for a tutor to help them out, tell them what your rates are (generally 20 bucks an hour in a midwestern university is fair. Youe also being tutored really easy math classes).
For example, whilst my Alma Mater numbers their engineering/science statistics course above calc I/II/III and diffy-q, one only needs to make calc I and II to get the pre reqs out of the way. In all honesty, the level of integration is simple enough (and it not like you actually have a clue of what is going on anyway) to warrant only calc one to follow the instructions. The necessity of calc II is part training you to follow instructions better, and part bureaucracy trying to siphon more money from you.
From your story, you seem most likely needing refreshers on college algebra, trig, pre calc and then business calc one and two, if not more, depending on the difficulty of your statistics course. You cant actually talk to an academic advisor, because they will try for good reason to get you to enroll in the courses that they think you need. That is their job, nothing you can do about it.
From the pre-reqs, either obtain the list of text book(s) from said TA or find the syllabus elsewhere, generally from emailing the instructor of a running class. If you tell an instructor that you would like to freshen up on the material but not take the class, if you could get a copy of the syllabus or audit, most of them would be most obliging. Do the problems on your own. If you want, go on Amazon/Half/Ebay and find the instructors manual. Push comes to shove, if you still cant make heads or tails of a problem, email your Tutor TA about setting up a time.
I suspect if you are diligent, i.e. 2 hours a day, you will drill through most of College Algebra in two months. After that if you remain diligent, you can expect to move through trig and pre-calc in another 2-4 months. Set goals and remain diligent at keeping them by eschewing wine, song, gaming of all sorts. It going to require a great deal of discipline, but if you follow through, youll end up wanting more. Best of luck.
This has clients for mac, linux, windows. You can pool each device for hardware/software configs. You can do patches through them.
It can do network devices as well.
And it's open source:)
Article links to another article which is paraphrasing some report made by a reporter who has seen this alleged draft Mike McConnell has a part in authoring, whilst the link to said report is dangling. I don't buy it. Seems like wacky journalism to me.
As a university student, I do understand your complaint, as I've heard it from countless other colleagues. As a university student who is looking to make mathematics his lifelong vocation, it is somewhat hard for me to stomach.
I take history classes because they are enlightening and fun. I look at the "softer" sciences as a means for applying my vocation in the future. I look at languages, the study of linguistics and realize that as irrational as human behavior seemingly is, each individual piece is a relatively simple, rational relationship. Thus, complexity can only be dealt with piece by piece, in a tenuous manner that slowly but surely fits back together. There are whole schools of mathematics devoted to modeling of complex systems, which generally fit under the umbrella of "Applied Math". As far as representation of complexity goes, mathematics can only get better. For something in its essence that is very much by definition a really fun game, with rules that could not be more remote from our intuition of the real world, it is remarkable how good it is for describing reality.
Regardless if your discipline uses mathematics directly or not, mathematics is perhaps the most direct method of demonstrating relation. The discovery and demonstrating of relation is quite simply the goal of academia. Through the learning of mathematics, if taught properly, the effect of this education is that the student approaches new information with the option of a rational approach. Since many of the discoveries in this world happens when disciplines cross-pollinate, having mathematics in the curriculum should be considered essential, since its approach to problem solving is used widely in all disciplines of rational basis.
My problem of mathematics that is taught is that little of it is used to further the discipline of discovering relationships until much latter. Most of the mathematics courses in the entry level are used to show certain equations can be used to solve certain problems. Few instructors in high school, or freshmen mathematics (even all the way to elementary differential equations) demonstrate how these equations were arrived it rigorously. It reduces math to a set of tricks that you pull out of a bag instead of being the language of description that it is. In the march to demonstrate its utility, the study of mathematics stops being organic and alive, and becomes rather dry and static. In its castrated form, it isn't very fun to learn unless you are interested in the problems the tricks are trying to solve, and to someone pursuing studies in history, it is probably not very useful, and hence even the utility aspect is lost on the student.
It's quite sad to look around slashdot in this discussion for example. There was a post about how fellow slashdotters would probably be sick of their fellow classmates not being able to grasp the concept of imaginary numbers. These classmates of his would fit right in with Pythagoreans (the cult around the mathematican) and a whole host of greek mathematicians of import. Pythagoreans found _irrational_ numbers to be blasphemous. Sqrt(2) would get you stoned. To many people before 1500, the imaginary numbers didn't exist. In fact, until Euler and Gauss came around to substantiate the need for imaginary numbers (in the 1700s), we never could quite contend with the reality of sqrt(-17) existing. By giving up ordering (greater than, equal or less than), we finally have a number system that allows all of our operations in arithmetic to work properly. It was a really big deal, a really long time to figure out, and the representation of enumerating something with two dimensions, as well as the loss of ordering is one of its greatest paths to resistance. It just didn't feel right for a long time. Without the imaginary number, euler's number makes no sense, differential geometry would not exist and our interpretation of sine and cosine would be limited at best. Nevermind that with a limited understanding of sine and cosine, fourier analysis
In Kansas City, these are:
Sprint, Black and Veatch (and a whole host of other engineering firms in Kansas City), Farmers Insurance, Cerner, are considered the bigger guns in tech hiring.
In Wichita, the predominant industry is aerospace and military contractors. There's money to be made that way in the tech sector pertaining to these industries.
In Western Kansas, oil is still relatively big business. University of Kansas is one of the few places in the midwest that offers Petroleum Engineering. Many students from OPEC come here for precisely that reason. Oil is still very much a presense in Kansas.
In South Western Kansas, most of the predominant industry is meat packing. You're not going to find much tech work there, but that's definitely a bread winner for a lot of the blue collar folk when smaller farms died.
Companies have also a habit of building call center farms in the midwest. Kansas is as midwest as it gets. Most call centers are built in college towns. Lawrence, a town of 80k people, has at NCS Pearson, Affinitas and Connex are top 10 hirers of people in the city besides the actual University and the town Government.
With respect to wages, I'm going to just give a quick breeze of the industries I've listed above, plus a lil extra for further reference:
Black and Veatch, starting 48k, most end up around 70 after 5 years.
Cerner, about the same block.
Sprint, depends on what you do. Mathematicians that matriculate in stats and stochastic modelling do very well, often ending up 90s without much trying. Admins make at least 50.
Farmers, if you do insurance work and you are being an actuary 200k is not unheard of. For programming, 70k in Kansas City Missouri/Kansas is plenty respectable.
Aerospace engineers make comparable to the above in terms of experience, however, they do get a lot more security. The military industrial complex is not downsizing soon.
Of the blue collar work, like, farm hands and meat packing varies from season to season and the influx of illegial immigrants into the state. If there is a union for your work, like sheet metal, expect 20 bucks or so an hour. If there isn't, like, farm hands, and you are competing against illegial immigrants, expect something closer to 6.50-10. If you are doing meat packing, that can vary a great deal, but most start at 8ish.
Call center work in lawrence starts at 8.50. Raises make it up to 12 if you are very very very good at taking shit and sounding impeccable on the phone.
I don't remember how well the oil rig workers do, since I've yet to talk to one for more than 10 minutes. Hope that was helpful.
You know, once upon a time, I shared your ideas about college. Most people I came into interaction within the tech field collaborated outside of academia and pursued their intellectual goals because academia was either not interested or had no knowledge of said goals at the time. Out of my friends, many distained academia for their own reasons, but largely it is because there is a projected image that to complete higher ed one must participate in a rat race that is both a racket and a soul-sucking experience. In some fields, I cannot deny that. These academic departments will make school a chore instead of a labor of love. You cannot do anything about that unless there is an overhaul of personel. However, whilst this mentality of cranking out graduates is prevalent in the departments that have direct vocational aptitude, it is definitely not in the liberal arts or the hard sciences. When I went back to school when I was 25, I did a great deal of research and self reflection before hand. I looked not to what was good for a job or for a career, but what I intrinsically found lacking in what composed of my intuition. I chose mathematics as a degree to pursue, hoping that one day I could solve interesting computer problems with tools garnered from the said study.
Not all college professors are good teachers. However, all of them are there to learn and they are enthused, tickled pink even, when someone steps to them with the appropriate enthusasim and attitude about learning. I went back to college after being repeatedly convinced by professors whom partake in the local chess club. As an undergrad, I am allowed to take first and second year graduate level math courses, and invariably when there is an undergrad math course with a graduate equivalent, I partake in the higher level class. No professor, and I do mean _not one_, has found me to be irritating. Tiresome maybe, but whilst they would grow short in patience because I don't get it right off the bat, they will not hesitate to try and help me again with the same problem the following day. Either I'm doing things the right way, or I'm really really lucky, where I do not deny that in my situation, it's a little bit of A and B
Perhaps people who go into math want to learn it for the most part, or perhaps the an air of humility and desire to learn garners me friends in the department with similar attitudes, but everyone whom I've spoken to about their attitudes towards the topic seems to want to garner understanding. Most of the people that I study with, do want to learn the material at hand and find the pursuit of intellectual understanding to be satisfying. We get overjoyed when we notice progress in our game, and we cheer as other people start picking up theirs too.
Now I'm getting to solve interesting math problems with computers, and I can't be happier. If you do your research before going to school, and hit the right school for your academic pursuits, many departments in even bargain institutions will work for you. If you are wanton for a renaissance education, I've been told that Evergreene State (state school in particular) and many smaller liberal arts colleges (in generality) will cater to your palette. Evergreene State does not offer grades for their students. The final feedback of the classes come from you as a student and your instructor in the form of one or two page essays. I once dated a girl from that school and had the opportunity to read her transcript. It includes responses from her about herself in the class, her class, and the instructors feedback on her in detail for every class she partook in. Each class is actually a series of topic which are in turn seperated into seminar and discussion sections. It seems that the rat race has been mostly excluded from this curriculum, and I would suggest looking into it if you have the self motivation to see yourself through this degree program.
Slashdot Mirror
How about a chat/video/voice client that has a real p2p component. I only know of one on the market and it's Zyptonite. Unfortunately the clients are closed source.
See here: https://app.zyptonite.com/ [zyptonite.com]
Is there anything that is free software?
James Baldwin: Notes of a Native Son, Nobody knows my name
James Salter: A sport and a pass time. Also 'American Express' if you like short stories.
Phil Klay: Redeployment
David Halberstam: Fifties, followed by The Best and the Brightest and The Children
Irwin Shaw: Young Lions
Well, literally whatever you want.
Of course the standard fortran compilers are already on there, such as the various gnus and intels.
https://www.nas.nasa.gov/hecc/...
I mean, you can even run pkgsrc stuff if you want.
Pleiades is just a slurm cluster. You can deploy new hardware, push your processes to be queued to the new hardware and link your run time to use cuda enabled libraries no problem.
Switching link time and link time hooks is pretty easy on Pleiades. It's the same way you would switch between python versions, different fortran run times (intel and gnu), different mpi runtimes (openmpi/sgi enabled stuff).
Source: worked on Advanced Vehicle Make and had to run cfd code on Pleiades.
WHUT?!?! Comcast was charging me almost 40 bucks after taxes for the 5 statics, and I was using the 50/10 plan.
I'm glad I switched to TDS.
If you get a low end commercial account for cable/adsl/pon/fiber, you can rent a range from your isp for 5-6 bucks a usable address. I rent a /29 for 30 added on to my pon bill.
Well, I think they are not the same thing. That's like going to a math conference and get disappointed that they don't hand out research awards for results found in mechanical engineering papers
Let's talk about two bodies of work that ought to be about the same type of people, but actually yield very different results. Let's compare James Salter's first two books, The Hunters and Cassada with The Expanse series.
James Salter's first two books draws from his experience as a late joiner to the American Army Aircorps, of which he graduated in 1945. The first book, Hunters, draws from his experience as a fighter pilot in the Korean War. It's about a guy who really wants to be successful as a fighter pilot. Throughout the book, while I the reader is constantly rooting for him, he is awash in self doubt. I don't think my efforts for rooting for him are in vain, but the character took awile for me to get to liking. Cassada on the other hand is about a guy who I imediately draw a liking to, but his charm does not extend to many of his cohorts within the book. I'm often surprised by what happens, how my heart strings get tugged with and it almost seems like disappointment hits both the characters and me in waves where I would least expect it.
But I read the Expanse series, and immediately the tropes jump out. As a novel where one co-author did the world building for an MMO game first, and then play tested it using D20 modern characters, the mechanics of this world seemed pre-ordained, the characters already seemed like they were a bit more sure of themselves and the people writing/playing them had a good idea on how they were going to react given a circumstance, as role player tend to have a habit of playing slightly different takes on the same theme most of the time. I open this book and come to feelings of simulteously being somewhere new, and having been there before, all at once. I remember a pair of adidas that I really liked playing basketball in when I was in my teens and in my late 20s it was re-released. The shoe felt similar, but better constructed. The Expanse feels no different.
Literary fiction toys with the literary fiction making process whilst in the guise of putting together a tale. The reader here does the work of deconstructing the process. The literary protaganist may be the center of the plot, but he/she/it isn't really driving it. Most of the time they aren't even all that likable in the beginning. I read literary fiction and examine how and why things are done while I anticipate what happens from page to page.
In commercial fiction, the main characters do most of the work for the reader. There's less playing around in style. Characters that drive the book are immediately likable. I don't really have to wonder about the why or the how. Most commercial fiction borrow important techniques from literary fiction from years past, and some sci fi writers read their literary fiction contemporaries (it's obvious that Neal Stephenson borrows from David Foster Wallace). So if I pay attention and keep up with my literary world stuff, the sci fi stuff will use dramatic techniques and plot devices that trickle down.
I've got an older GTX 760 running on an HP Z820. I run ubuntu on this thing and use nvidia-352 drivers. When I log out of gnome3 and log back in through lightdm, I see the same exact symptoms. I can see what was previously displayed on my framebuffer, including firefox and chromium windows.
Well, a great deal about surviving as an adult is having the right answers and having a job. A large majority of students produced by an education system will not only remember facts taught, but at least be able to regurgitate the official explanation as to why these facts occurred, as well as a few token methods of deconstruction. Those that want to understand more about their subjects at school would be capable of understanding how the education system.
A large part of working in the US is being trained for a vocation, where the particular parts of the vocation are neither interesting nor necessarily logical, but the skillset fits together and rote memorization leading to mastery. It is important for a linux sys admin to understand how a mail server interacts with the kernel by way of syscalls, but while it is nice, it's not really necessary to understand the fundamental
Your 'reasoning' was hardly reasonable. The statement 'Frankly, I find the notion that you can hand out one-size-fits-all standardized tests to everyone and quantify people's understanding of the material to be utterly absurd, and frankly, harmful.' is a poorly researched opinion. My statement of similarly worded tests for calc 1,2,3, as is evident as anyone who has taken these classes, as well as the very minor editorial changes that have occurred since between older text books in print vis a vis current text books, as anyone who owns multiple copies of calc 1,2,3 textbooks, knows that the material in these classes haven't changed despite some of these books were printed before standardized testing became popular, and some of them after. The curriculum has been standardized, the testing of this curriculum has been standardized, at least for these three subjects at the university level, without the presence of a standards committee. But it has effectively annealed.
I think the biggest issue here is that culturally, there is a distrust of education authorities in this country overall, and specifically that a test on paper has a difficult time simulating actual problem solving needs. America is not a country that has a culture that prizes intellect. But fortunately, it's not a belief that is shared by many other western and far east countries.
The benefit increasing test scores by approaching the problem a different way seems inconsequential to some because those are largely of the opinion that tests don't matter in the first place. The fact is that book learning is very well correlated to the performance on a test, and if nationally or at least within a school district, we agree on a curriculum to teach, then a paper test that is standardized properly should work very well for that curriculum.
Because a large part of professional success comes from recognizing an encountered problem is similar to a previously problem, and one only has to change a few things to apply known methods to the 'new' problem. You need rote memorization to remember previous problems and their associated methods, you need pattern recognition to see that different problems may actually have a similar structure.
Frankly, testing everyone the same way, based on a standard syllabus on how material ought to be taught, limits a) the scope of the inquiry and b) the variance of the starting conditions of the student. The tests only measure the ability of students to solve problems, where the methods to arrive at proper solutions are what is taught in the course. There are only so many ways to write a calculus one, two, three test, and this is freshmen and sophomore college mathematics for engineers. A cursory examination of finals of the last 15 years by of those classes listed from the different department consists of similarly worded problems and types of questions. I can buy a 30 year old schaums that gives me practice problems that will prepare me well for a final in those classes. And quite quickly, one can look at the answers a student has submitted and know if the student has a clue of what is going on.
And before you argue that Algebra 1/2 are different courses than a college calculus course, do realize that the scope of the inquiry within high school classes are much more limited.
The scope of the material hasn't changed much over the years, the problems of testing the students haven't changed much either, why the resistance of standardized tests? It works well enough.
The issue here is that most infrastructure improvements of a university are paid for by the state and/or the alumni. Other sorts of funding include NSF/DARPA/etc where a large percentage of the money comes in is chopped up. If you are a heavy R&D shop, even if you are part of a private school, the US government pays for a large chunk of your engineering, science and even a bit of your math department. However you trickle it down, this government funding will affect the scholastic experience of all students, including foreign ones that pay out of state or private tuition.
Most university policies demand that a professor cannot take a cut from selling his own work for his classes. It's a pretty big deal. Most of the time it is because he boot strapped his lesson plan from ground up and didn't really want to change it around with what the text books are offering. As far as I understand it, it's mostly a labor of love.
If you live at or near a college town, go to the math department itself. See if they have a preferred tutors list. Pick 3 names off the list, generally the senior the better.
Write each of them an email, explaining to them your particular quandry. Let them know what statistics/math course you want to take to graduate. Ask them about the pre-reqs and what you have to know from them. Let them know you will be looking for a tutor to help them out, tell them what your rates are (generally 20 bucks an hour in a midwestern university is fair. Youe also being tutored really easy math classes).
For example, whilst my Alma Mater numbers their engineering/science statistics course above calc I/II/III and diffy-q, one only needs to make calc I and II to get the pre reqs out of the way. In all honesty, the level of integration is simple enough (and it not like you actually have a clue of what is going on anyway) to warrant only calc one to follow the instructions. The necessity of calc II is part training you to follow instructions better, and part bureaucracy trying to siphon more money from you.
From your story, you seem most likely needing refreshers on college algebra, trig, pre calc and then business calc one and two, if not more, depending on the difficulty of your statistics course. You cant actually talk to an academic advisor, because they will try for good reason to get you to enroll in the courses that they think you need. That is their job, nothing you can do about it.
From the pre-reqs, either obtain the list of text book(s) from said TA or find the syllabus elsewhere, generally from emailing the instructor of a running class. If you tell an instructor that you would like to freshen up on the material but not take the class, if you could get a copy of the syllabus or audit, most of them would be most obliging. Do the problems on your own. If you want, go on Amazon/Half/Ebay and find the instructors manual. Push comes to shove, if you still cant make heads or tails of a problem, email your Tutor TA about setting up a time.
I suspect if you are diligent, i.e. 2 hours a day, you will drill through most of College Algebra in two months. After that if you remain diligent, you can expect to move through trig and pre-calc in another 2-4 months. Set goals and remain diligent at keeping them by eschewing wine, song, gaming of all sorts. It going to require a great deal of discipline, but if you follow through, youll end up wanting more. Best of luck.
This has clients for mac, linux, windows. You can pool each device for hardware/software configs. You can do patches through them. It can do network devices as well. And it's open source :)
Article links to another article which is paraphrasing some report made by a reporter who has seen this alleged draft Mike McConnell has a part in authoring, whilst the link to said report is dangling. I don't buy it. Seems like wacky journalism to me.
As a university student, I do understand your complaint, as I've heard it from countless other colleagues. As a university student who is looking to make mathematics his lifelong vocation, it is somewhat hard for me to stomach.
I take history classes because they are enlightening and fun. I look at the "softer" sciences as a means for applying my vocation in the future. I look at languages, the study of linguistics and realize that as irrational as human behavior seemingly is, each individual piece is a relatively simple, rational relationship. Thus, complexity can only be dealt with piece by piece, in a tenuous manner that slowly but surely fits back together. There are whole schools of mathematics devoted to modeling of complex systems, which generally fit under the umbrella of "Applied Math". As far as representation of complexity goes, mathematics can only get better. For something in its essence that is very much by definition a really fun game, with rules that could not be more remote from our intuition of the real world, it is remarkable how good it is for describing reality.
Regardless if your discipline uses mathematics directly or not, mathematics is perhaps the most direct method of demonstrating relation. The discovery and demonstrating of relation is quite simply the goal of academia. Through the learning of mathematics, if taught properly, the effect of this education is that the student approaches new information with the option of a rational approach. Since many of the discoveries in this world happens when disciplines cross-pollinate, having mathematics in the curriculum should be considered essential, since its approach to problem solving is used widely in all disciplines of rational basis.
My problem of mathematics that is taught is that little of it is used to further the discipline of discovering relationships until much latter. Most of the mathematics courses in the entry level are used to show certain equations can be used to solve certain problems. Few instructors in high school, or freshmen mathematics (even all the way to elementary differential equations) demonstrate how these equations were arrived it rigorously. It reduces math to a set of tricks that you pull out of a bag instead of being the language of description that it is. In the march to demonstrate its utility, the study of mathematics stops being organic and alive, and becomes rather dry and static. In its castrated form, it isn't very fun to learn unless you are interested in the problems the tricks are trying to solve, and to someone pursuing studies in history, it is probably not very useful, and hence even the utility aspect is lost on the student.
It's quite sad to look around slashdot in this discussion for example. There was a post about how fellow slashdotters would probably be sick of their fellow classmates not being able to grasp the concept of imaginary numbers. These classmates of his would fit right in with Pythagoreans (the cult around the mathematican) and a whole host of greek mathematicians of import. Pythagoreans found _irrational_ numbers to be blasphemous. Sqrt(2) would get you stoned. To many people before 1500, the imaginary numbers didn't exist. In fact, until Euler and Gauss came around to substantiate the need for imaginary numbers (in the 1700s), we never could quite contend with the reality of sqrt(-17) existing. By giving up ordering (greater than, equal or less than), we finally have a number system that allows all of our operations in arithmetic to work properly. It was a really big deal, a really long time to figure out, and the representation of enumerating something with two dimensions, as well as the loss of ordering is one of its greatest paths to resistance. It just didn't feel right for a long time. Without the imaginary number, euler's number makes no sense, differential geometry would not exist and our interpretation of sine and cosine would be limited at best. Nevermind that with a limited understanding of sine and cosine, fourier analysis
In Kansas City, these are: Sprint, Black and Veatch (and a whole host of other engineering firms in Kansas City), Farmers Insurance, Cerner, are considered the bigger guns in tech hiring. In Wichita, the predominant industry is aerospace and military contractors. There's money to be made that way in the tech sector pertaining to these industries. In Western Kansas, oil is still relatively big business. University of Kansas is one of the few places in the midwest that offers Petroleum Engineering. Many students from OPEC come here for precisely that reason. Oil is still very much a presense in Kansas. In South Western Kansas, most of the predominant industry is meat packing. You're not going to find much tech work there, but that's definitely a bread winner for a lot of the blue collar folk when smaller farms died. Companies have also a habit of building call center farms in the midwest. Kansas is as midwest as it gets. Most call centers are built in college towns. Lawrence, a town of 80k people, has at NCS Pearson, Affinitas and Connex are top 10 hirers of people in the city besides the actual University and the town Government. With respect to wages, I'm going to just give a quick breeze of the industries I've listed above, plus a lil extra for further reference: Black and Veatch, starting 48k, most end up around 70 after 5 years. Cerner, about the same block. Sprint, depends on what you do. Mathematicians that matriculate in stats and stochastic modelling do very well, often ending up 90s without much trying. Admins make at least 50. Farmers, if you do insurance work and you are being an actuary 200k is not unheard of. For programming, 70k in Kansas City Missouri/Kansas is plenty respectable. Aerospace engineers make comparable to the above in terms of experience, however, they do get a lot more security. The military industrial complex is not downsizing soon. Of the blue collar work, like, farm hands and meat packing varies from season to season and the influx of illegial immigrants into the state. If there is a union for your work, like sheet metal, expect 20 bucks or so an hour. If there isn't, like, farm hands, and you are competing against illegial immigrants, expect something closer to 6.50-10. If you are doing meat packing, that can vary a great deal, but most start at 8ish. Call center work in lawrence starts at 8.50. Raises make it up to 12 if you are very very very good at taking shit and sounding impeccable on the phone. I don't remember how well the oil rig workers do, since I've yet to talk to one for more than 10 minutes. Hope that was helpful.
You know, once upon a time, I shared your ideas about college. Most people I came into interaction within the tech field collaborated outside of academia and pursued their intellectual goals because academia was either not interested or had no knowledge of said goals at the time. Out of my friends, many distained academia for their own reasons, but largely it is because there is a projected image that to complete higher ed one must participate in a rat race that is both a racket and a soul-sucking experience. In some fields, I cannot deny that. These academic departments will make school a chore instead of a labor of love. You cannot do anything about that unless there is an overhaul of personel. However, whilst this mentality of cranking out graduates is prevalent in the departments that have direct vocational aptitude, it is definitely not in the liberal arts or the hard sciences. When I went back to school when I was 25, I did a great deal of research and self reflection before hand. I looked not to what was good for a job or for a career, but what I intrinsically found lacking in what composed of my intuition. I chose mathematics as a degree to pursue, hoping that one day I could solve interesting computer problems with tools garnered from the said study. Not all college professors are good teachers. However, all of them are there to learn and they are enthused, tickled pink even, when someone steps to them with the appropriate enthusasim and attitude about learning. I went back to college after being repeatedly convinced by professors whom partake in the local chess club. As an undergrad, I am allowed to take first and second year graduate level math courses, and invariably when there is an undergrad math course with a graduate equivalent, I partake in the higher level class. No professor, and I do mean _not one_, has found me to be irritating. Tiresome maybe, but whilst they would grow short in patience because I don't get it right off the bat, they will not hesitate to try and help me again with the same problem the following day. Either I'm doing things the right way, or I'm really really lucky, where I do not deny that in my situation, it's a little bit of A and B Perhaps people who go into math want to learn it for the most part, or perhaps the an air of humility and desire to learn garners me friends in the department with similar attitudes, but everyone whom I've spoken to about their attitudes towards the topic seems to want to garner understanding. Most of the people that I study with, do want to learn the material at hand and find the pursuit of intellectual understanding to be satisfying. We get overjoyed when we notice progress in our game, and we cheer as other people start picking up theirs too. Now I'm getting to solve interesting math problems with computers, and I can't be happier. If you do your research before going to school, and hit the right school for your academic pursuits, many departments in even bargain institutions will work for you. If you are wanton for a renaissance education, I've been told that Evergreene State (state school in particular) and many smaller liberal arts colleges (in generality) will cater to your palette. Evergreene State does not offer grades for their students. The final feedback of the classes come from you as a student and your instructor in the form of one or two page essays. I once dated a girl from that school and had the opportunity to read her transcript. It includes responses from her about herself in the class, her class, and the instructors feedback on her in detail for every class she partook in. Each class is actually a series of topic which are in turn seperated into seminar and discussion sections. It seems that the rat race has been mostly excluded from this curriculum, and I would suggest looking into it if you have the self motivation to see yourself through this degree program.