" two years of learning to really understanding the domain and the related systems, then a year of great productivity as you really hum because you are no longer dealing with much internal overhead in getting work done."
So as the employer, that's a pretty shitty deal. I'd really like to hang onto a team who are really humming for longer than that. Who know how things work, who know where everything in the code is and how its organized, who've mastered processes, who actually understand the knowledge domain we're developing software to solve so the friction between requirements and implementation is much lower...
"Much longer than that and you start to grow tired of repetition, or the little things that were always problems start to annoy you more and more."
I think this is where we diverge. You want out to get away from this... I want to know why we can't fix this.
FWIW I've never worked anywhere really big; i prefer smaller companies; because I like them more. They aren't as rigid, the work is really varied, everyone is wearing 2 or 3 hats.
"That's probably the thing to really look out for, be self aware of how you feel you are doing in your job. That can be the signal as to when you might want to start looking for something new, if you notice that your own performance starting to decline for any reason."
I agree with you here, but looking at it from the other side, as the employer -- they should be looking to figure out how to resolve these 'problems'. Because losing good people after a few years in an industry where it takes a couple years to hit their stride is a huge waste.
"I've heard it said that 10 years in one company is more like two years of experience repeated five times over."
I think it can be. I don't think it has to be. It'll depend on the company and your role(s) in it.
"So you agree with me. It's not the age of the building that makes it interesting and famous, but the lean."
If someone identified a building in Detroit built in the 70s that was was now leaning that much, it would be torn down; and nobody would care.
The lean certainly makes it MORE interesting and elevates it from a world heritage site worth preserving to a world famous landmark; but its definitely not the whole story. It's age and history are a big deal; along with the fact that its been leaning for pretty much the whole time.
I agree mostly. Legally this is a nothingburger, and even less of a nothing burger than Hillary's email were.
Where i disagree with you is with the significance of the optics.
Trump and the republican party at large wandered around for months making a mountain out of Hillary's email -- Fox news still seems to make it a landing page headline every few days.
Given that environment, anyone with an ounce of common sense associated with Trump or the republican party would have made damned sure not to be using a personal email for government work of any sort.
If you make it a central plank of your campaign that Hillary Clinton's misuse of email not only disqualifies her for public service, but demands a prosecution, demands incarceration. Then you don't get caught using a personal email server yourself, no matter how trivial it REALLY is.
Legally there's no fire here, but the apparent level of hypocrisy, arrogance, and stupidity on display is staggering. Or it would be if it wasn't just another day in this dumpster fire of an administration.
"Sure a Chromebook isn't a "real" computer. Or is it... Did you know you can program an Arduino from a Chromebook? You can. You can also edit images, audio, and video...and run any Linux application."
Or for exactly the same price I get an actual laptop that does *all* of that and runs any windows program too. To me that's the problem chromebooks have; the budget stuff at the low end is garbage... screen too small, keyboard cramped, low quality, fragile.
Now you can go upmarket from the bottom, and chromebooks offer that... but at pricepoint that no longer has any advantage over PCs. Sure a $1200 pixel book is a nice enough device... but for $1200 i'll get a dell or a microsoft surfacebook or maybe a mac... and I'd argue that's a much better value.
For comparison, after a lot of research, I bought my kids education series dell latitudes... they were reasonable, decent spec'd (ram + cpu + ssd), rugged little laptops. The screens aren't great. They're fine, but the viewing angles are restricted, and that's the only real compromise in the device. But I think it's a better value, and better constructed device that can survive a lot more abuse and do lot more than a chromebook at the same price point.
Meanwhile schools are loading up on the budget devices; which may ultimately just be too limited. And if they are forced to move up-market for a truly productive device, the case for a chromebook over another laptop is a lot weaker. I also haven't been impressed by chromebooks ruggedness - the e-series latitudes i mentioned aren't indestructible but i'm not living in fear as they go back and forth to school in the kids book bags and tossed around. I wouldn't knock one off the table on purpose... but i'd give it far better odds of surviving the landing.
"In fact these are quite attractive to a small business due to things like having your accountant/book keeper "
Meh, most accountants and bookkeepers I've met advise against using cloud products; most of them are either more expensive or more limited or both. Not to mention being tied to your internet availability, and there service availability, and being subjected to random user interface changes and feature breakages... yeah its the holy grail of what people want for bookkeeping.
"due to things like having your accountant/book keeper and yourself being able to see the same set of up to date accounts."
Because there wasn't a pile of simple ways of dealing with that before? From teamviewer to remote desktop to dropbox; accountants have been solving that problem for a couple decades now.
"I have to say, it's a perfect device for most people. It "just works", and they don't have to have a degree in comp-sci to manage the thing."
Yeah, just do all your computing, shopping, and interacting with the world using a device built by an advertising company that wants to monetize you. What could possibly be undesirable about that.
"Yeah yeah someone ALWAYS points out that they can't use one because of UberCadSuperSimulationPublisherLatheController 44.0, but those people are a minuscule minority"
No they aren't. They want to work on a powerpoint or spreadhsheet using exactly the same software they use at work. They run a small business and need some accounting software. They bought a logitech harmony universal remote and want to program it, they want to play some random steam game.
"When that generation of kids gets to be adults, they'll keep using ChromeOS."
For a while it was all ipads ipads ipads, every student gets an ipad, and schools couldn't buy enough ipads, and then the schools discovered they weren't really all that great for education after all. And now home users are finding between their smartphone and their laptop the tablet isn't that useful there either, and the next great thing is now becoming a niche -- still useful and definitely has a place but we didn't get rid of all our computers for them in the end.
Chromebooks are the new tablets which were the new netbooks... maybe they'll take hold... or maybe they'll be ultimately found to be too limiting too. The jury's still out. For me... as lousy as windows 10 is... chromeOs is not an improvement.
"How can they be official Apple batteries if Apple isn't selling them?"
Trivial: They could have been acquired while apple was selling them. Then they sat somewhere.
For example, there's fairly brisk trade in laptop parts for certain popular discontinued laptops (including Apple) where the replacement parts are being recycled from units. e.g. the screen from a unit with a dead mainboard, or the mainboard from a unit with a dead screen... i repaired my old clamshell macbook for years with genuine apple parts you could no longer purchase from Apple.
Counterfeit product is a real issue as well, to be sure. But it's overreaching pretty far to assume that just because apple won't sell you X that X is counterfeit.
"Things like this always strike me as awfully nationalist and willfully ignorant propaganda terrorism. (So just like such bots.)"
Yes. And?
I mean, it is what you say it is. The US surely runs it's own too. And we're not going to get to see it unless or until someone leaks it. Which at some point will likely happen.
And then perhaps you'll speculate it was a false flag to make us look bad? Which it might be.
At some point you have to choose what you will believe, and determine what sources are likely to be as credible as is reasonable.
"But do I think it was a terrible pile of garbage that everyone involved should be ashamed of and harassed endlessly over? Absolutely not."
The chase scene with the ships running out of fuel was ridulous. Like it had been cribbed from a WW2 naval script and nobody asked if it made an iota of sense in space. (And I'm not talking real physics, but it fails to fit even in Star Wars fictional physics.
Then the highest ranking twit in the rebel alliance has to stay on board to steer the last ship because what they don't have any autopilot? or spare droids?
Then they ram their pursuers with a jump to light speed undermining the the entire series to date? Wait... that works? Why didn't they use that before? Why didin't they throw a couple xwings into the big guns on death star 1 and 2 ? Or the super star destroyers? Or all the star destroyers in the imperial fleet? Would have cost them less than they lost in the trench run alone.
It was a terrible pile of garbage that the producers should be ashamed of it.
And that's just one plot thread... there was plenty else wrong with it.
Yeah, there will always be things that are not repairable. And sure, densely integrated electronics in maximally portable devices are a good candidate. I don't really care if a cellphone is like 3-4 parts... screen, PCB, battery, case. Or that if my earbug headphones break that they have no serviceable parts at all. I can deal with that.
But its a bigger problem than just cellphones; stuff like farm tractors, major appliances, hvac stuff, industrial robots/machinery... where the manufacturers are holding you hostage.
There are market forces and physical realities about cellphones that make repairing them legitimately impractical. The same is not true for this other stuff.
"If what Apple did was so simple and obvious, why did nobody do it before them?"
I really think it was coming anyway. The pieces had been building up to it for years. I had a windows mobile/ winCE ? i don't recall the branding at the time; but it was a touchscreen device, with a stylus and slideout keyboard before the iphone.
Honestly, i think apple's big hit was in large part precisely because they weren't tethered to backwards compatibility; and built the os and apps for the device, and there was no one saying... well it needs to run "Excel and Word Mobile 2000" or whatever...
Likewise, blackberry was chasing the enterprise, the devices only worked with BES, and they didn't think the consumer market existed. And likewise their OS was too tied up with their legacy compatibility needs to make a fresh start.
Apple came in with a product that couldn't do any of the enterprise stuff; it was basically a web browser, phone, contacts, calendar, and an ipod. it didn't have real apps, didn't do enteprise security / policy, etc... but since apple never had any of that history that consumers would expect them to support they didn't need to figure out a way of moving that forward, that gave them a lot more freedom and agility to make a good product.
I think without apple the other guys would have gotten there anyway. Things were already heading in that direction, but apple was a lot more nimble because they weren't hauling legacy boat anchors of existing code.
(And Motorola was just caught with its pants down; they had a terrific series of products.. from the starTAC through the TimePort to the Razr... they were doing fine, and just didn't see the smartphone revolution coming until it was too late.)
Yeah, nobody is going to lose any sleep over a footnote that says "The manager worker or pattern used to be called master / slave or whatever they end up with.
"APIs, and working code?"
Existing APIs and code can continue to use it until they get retired. Its not like its a python keyword or something. From what I can see this was a documentation and code samples update; so its not in the docs and example code.
"What happens to those who want to keep master and slave get fired"
Why would anyone "want" to keep it? That's my point.
While I personally don't think its something worth fussing over; and I get that a minority of people are upset about it -- what I don't get is: who are these people that care so much to keep it?
Its not some orwellion doublespeak where I'm being told to beleive and repeat a lie; and it would be a principled stance to stand against it.
What "principled stance" are they trying to make by insisting we must keep call a design pattern "master" and "slave" instead of 'manager/worker' or something?
Who will refuse to just 'roll with it' to the point that it gets them fired? What's the point? What is the reasoning for that?
I'm firmly in the camp that thinks this is much ado about nothing.
But in the spirit of it being much ado about nothing, it seems absurd for me to get worked up about it. So if let them try to change it if it makes them feel better... if it gets traction and sticks... fine, whatever.
"A large part of science and engineering research is being able to convey your findings to other - through written papers and presentations."
Yes. And we work in teams. And not everyone on the team is able to do presentations, and that's not a problem. The TEAM definitely needs someone who can present well, but not everyone on the team needs to be a presenter.
1) A students score in an academic subject should not depend on their public speaking comfort and performance. Think about that. It makes good sense. Why does your science research project mark depend on 'eye contact' and not saying 'um' ? That's as ridiculous an grading a mathematics assignment on your singing voice and fashion sense.
2) Public speaking, and speaking in front of others is an important life skill and students need to learn how to do it; and should not be excused from doing it, even if it makes them uncomfortable.
Reconciling this really shouldn't be that hard. Separate the academic marks from the public speaking/presentation marks. Your science mark is what you know in science. Offer separate classes in public speaking and debate etc. Still HAVE the science presentations though, but apply your science presentation "presentation performance" mark to the other course. So no matter how badly you blow the presentation performance it doesn't affect your science mark; that's graded on the content you hand in.
People with anxiety will struggle in this 2ndary course; but at least it doesn't affect their academic marks. I'd say this 2ndary course should be mandatory -- public speaking is an important life skill that people need to do, but i extreme cases could be excused.
Right. If I understood it right, 'Imposter syndrome' is more the latter; where you are genuinely competent; but nevertheless fear you don't measure up and are worried others will find out... despite you being reasonably competent.
But its not that you aren't "smart" enough to recognize you are competent, instead its more on the irrational anxiety/paranoia spectrum.
At any rate its a really weird article because it doesn't seem to differentiate between the Socratic wisdom you cite and and the anxiety 'syndrome'. The vast majority of people don't have 'imposter syndrome', they're just bona fide bullshitting their way around and they know it. And that's NOT imposter syndrome.
Slashdot Mirror
You haven't thought it through.
Any system that increases the likelihood that parents aren't sitting next to their own kids increases the odds that you'll be sitting next to them.
How is that a win for you?
And to me this is just sad.
" two years of learning to really understanding the domain and the related systems, then a year of great productivity as you really hum because you are no longer dealing with much internal overhead in getting work done."
So as the employer, that's a pretty shitty deal. I'd really like to hang onto a team who are really humming for longer than that. Who know how things work, who know where everything in the code is and how its organized, who've mastered processes, who actually understand the knowledge domain we're developing software to solve so the friction between requirements and implementation is much lower...
"Much longer than that and you start to grow tired of repetition, or the little things that were always problems start to annoy you more and more."
I think this is where we diverge. You want out to get away from this... I want to know why we can't fix this.
FWIW I've never worked anywhere really big; i prefer smaller companies; because I like them more. They aren't as rigid, the work is really varied, everyone is wearing 2 or 3 hats.
"That's probably the thing to really look out for, be self aware of how you feel you are doing in your job. That can be the signal as to when you might want to start looking for something new, if you notice that your own performance starting to decline for any reason."
I agree with you here, but looking at it from the other side, as the employer -- they should be looking to figure out how to resolve these 'problems'. Because losing good people after a few years in an industry where it takes a couple years to hit their stride is a huge waste.
"I've heard it said that 10 years in one company is more like two years of experience repeated five times over."
I think it can be. I don't think it has to be. It'll depend on the company and your role(s) in it.
"This says more about what's missing in JavaScript that people want than any success for Microsoft. I guess inheritance is useful after all."
Strong typing is the feature that javascript was missing that typescript adds, which is pretty much why TYPEscript exists.
It dramatically improves the maintainability of code.
"So you agree with me. It's not the age of the building that makes it interesting and famous, but the lean."
If someone identified a building in Detroit built in the 70s that was was now leaning that much, it would be torn down; and nobody would care.
The lean certainly makes it MORE interesting and elevates it from a world heritage site worth preserving to a world famous landmark; but its definitely not the whole story. It's age and history are a big deal; along with the fact that its been leaning for pretty much the whole time.
I agree mostly. Legally this is a nothingburger, and even less of a nothing burger than Hillary's email were.
Where i disagree with you is with the significance of the optics.
Trump and the republican party at large wandered around for months making a mountain out of Hillary's email -- Fox news still seems to make it a landing page headline every few days.
Given that environment, anyone with an ounce of common sense associated with Trump or the republican party would have made damned sure not to be using a personal email for government work of any sort.
If you make it a central plank of your campaign that Hillary Clinton's misuse of email not only disqualifies her for public service, but demands a prosecution, demands incarceration. Then you don't get caught using a personal email server yourself, no matter how trivial it REALLY is.
Legally there's no fire here, but the apparent level of hypocrisy, arrogance, and stupidity on display is staggering. Or it would be if it wasn't just another day in this dumpster fire of an administration.
That was exactly my thought too when i read this.
Your own wikipedia link mentions AMD Socket G34 and SP3 processors; the WiiU, Pentium Pro, and Pentium D, amongst others...
Ok. You aren't wrong.
"Sure a Chromebook isn't a "real" computer. Or is it... Did you know you can program an Arduino from a Chromebook? You can. You can also edit images, audio, and video...and run any Linux application."
Or for exactly the same price I get an actual laptop that does *all* of that and runs any windows program too. To me that's the problem chromebooks have; the budget stuff at the low end is garbage ... screen too small, keyboard cramped, low quality, fragile.
Now you can go upmarket from the bottom, and chromebooks offer that... but at pricepoint that no longer has any advantage over PCs. Sure a $1200 pixel book is a nice enough device... but for $1200 i'll get a dell or a microsoft surfacebook or maybe a mac... and I'd argue that's a much better value.
For comparison, after a lot of research, I bought my kids education series dell latitudes... they were reasonable, decent spec'd (ram + cpu + ssd), rugged little laptops. The screens aren't great. They're fine, but the viewing angles are restricted, and that's the only real compromise in the device. But I think it's a better value, and better constructed device that can survive a lot more abuse and do lot more than a chromebook at the same price point.
Meanwhile schools are loading up on the budget devices; which may ultimately just be too limited. And if they are forced to move up-market for a truly productive device, the case for a chromebook over another laptop is a lot weaker. I also haven't been impressed by chromebooks ruggedness - the e-series latitudes i mentioned aren't indestructible but i'm not living in fear as they go back and forth to school in the kids book bags and tossed around. I wouldn't knock one off the table on purpose... but i'd give it far better odds of surviving the landing.
"In fact these are quite attractive to a small business due to things like having your accountant/book keeper "
Meh, most accountants and bookkeepers I've met advise against using cloud products; most of them are either more expensive or more limited or both. Not to mention being tied to your internet availability, and there service availability, and being subjected to random user interface changes and feature breakages... yeah its the holy grail of what people want for bookkeeping.
"due to things like having your accountant/book keeper and yourself being able to see the same set of up to date accounts."
Because there wasn't a pile of simple ways of dealing with that before? From teamviewer to remote desktop to dropbox; accountants have been solving that problem for a couple decades now.
"Your point was?"
The real question is: "What was yours?"
"I have to say, it's a perfect device for most people. It "just works", and they don't have to have a degree in comp-sci to manage the thing."
Yeah, just do all your computing, shopping, and interacting with the world using a device built by an advertising company that wants to monetize you. What could possibly be undesirable about that.
"Yeah yeah someone ALWAYS points out that they can't use one because of UberCadSuperSimulationPublisherLatheController 44.0, but those people are a minuscule minority"
No they aren't. They want to work on a powerpoint or spreadhsheet using exactly the same software they use at work. They run a small business and need some accounting software. They bought a logitech harmony universal remote and want to program it, they want to play some random steam game.
"When that generation of kids gets to be adults, they'll keep using ChromeOS."
For a while it was all ipads ipads ipads, every student gets an ipad, and schools couldn't buy enough ipads, and then the schools discovered they weren't really all that great for education after all. And now home users are finding between their smartphone and their laptop the tablet isn't that useful there either, and the next great thing is now becoming a niche -- still useful and definitely has a place but we didn't get rid of all our computers for them in the end.
Chromebooks are the new tablets which were the new netbooks... maybe they'll take hold... or maybe they'll be ultimately found to be too limiting too. The jury's still out. For me... as lousy as windows 10 is... chromeOs is not an improvement.
Thanks for that. I was trying to think of the term; lots of vintage / collector stuff is available like this... toys especially.
You can easily buy lego sets new in the box that lego hasn't sold for 20+ years; and they aren't "counterfeit". :)
"How can they be official Apple batteries if Apple isn't selling them?"
Trivial: They could have been acquired while apple was selling them. Then they sat somewhere.
For example, there's fairly brisk trade in laptop parts for certain popular discontinued laptops (including Apple) where the replacement parts are being recycled from units. e.g. the screen from a unit with a dead mainboard, or the mainboard from a unit with a dead screen... i repaired my old clamshell macbook for years with genuine apple parts you could no longer purchase from Apple.
Counterfeit product is a real issue as well, to be sure. But it's overreaching pretty far to assume that just because apple won't sell you X that X is counterfeit.
I mean... will a can of mud or paint thrown at the cameras sensors, and/or an rf jammer cause the driverless trucks to drive off the road?
Be really hilarious* if it were remotely hackable, and supply trucks just drove away.
* not remotely hilarious if you depended on the supplies of course.
"Things like this always strike me as awfully nationalist and willfully ignorant propaganda terrorism. (So just like such bots.)"
Yes. And?
I mean, it is what you say it is. The US surely runs it's own too. And we're not going to get to see it unless or until someone leaks it. Which at some point will likely happen.
And then perhaps you'll speculate it was a false flag to make us look bad? Which it might be.
At some point you have to choose what you will believe, and determine what sources are likely to be as credible as is reasonable.
So... where does that leave us?
"But do I think it was a terrible pile of garbage that everyone involved should be ashamed of and harassed endlessly over? Absolutely not."
The chase scene with the ships running out of fuel was ridulous. Like it had been cribbed from a WW2 naval script and nobody asked if it made an iota of sense in space. (And I'm not talking real physics, but it fails to fit even in Star Wars fictional physics.
Then the highest ranking twit in the rebel alliance has to stay on board to steer the last ship because what they don't have any autopilot? or spare droids?
Then they ram their pursuers with a jump to light speed undermining the the entire series to date? Wait... that works? Why didn't they use that before? Why didin't they throw a couple xwings into the big guns on death star 1 and 2 ? Or the super star destroyers? Or all the star destroyers in the imperial fleet? Would have cost them less than they lost in the trench run alone.
It was a terrible pile of garbage that the producers should be ashamed of it.
And that's just one plot thread... there was plenty else wrong with it.
Yeah, there will always be things that are not repairable. And sure, densely integrated electronics in maximally portable devices are a good candidate. I don't really care if a cellphone is like 3-4 parts... screen, PCB, battery, case. Or that if my earbug headphones break that they have no serviceable parts at all. I can deal with that.
But its a bigger problem than just cellphones; stuff like farm tractors, major appliances, hvac stuff, industrial robots/machinery... where the manufacturers are holding you hostage.
There are market forces and physical realities about cellphones that make repairing them legitimately impractical. The same is not true for this other stuff.
"If what Apple did was so simple and obvious, why did nobody do it before them?"
I really think it was coming anyway. The pieces had been building up to it for years. I had a windows mobile/ winCE ? i don't recall the branding at the time; but it was a touchscreen device, with a stylus and slideout keyboard before the iphone.
Honestly, i think apple's big hit was in large part precisely because they weren't tethered to backwards compatibility; and built the os and apps for the device, and there was no one saying ... well it needs to run "Excel and Word Mobile 2000" or whatever...
Likewise, blackberry was chasing the enterprise, the devices only worked with BES, and they didn't think the consumer market existed. And likewise their OS was too tied up with their legacy compatibility needs to make a fresh start.
Apple came in with a product that couldn't do any of the enterprise stuff; it was basically a web browser, phone, contacts, calendar, and an ipod. it didn't have real apps, didn't do enteprise security / policy, etc... but since apple never had any of that history that consumers would expect them to support they didn't need to figure out a way of moving that forward, that gave them a lot more freedom and agility to make a good product.
I think without apple the other guys would have gotten there anyway. Things were already heading in that direction, but apple was a lot more nimble because they weren't hauling legacy boat anchors of existing code.
(And Motorola was just caught with its pants down; they had a terrific series of products .. from the starTAC through the TimePort to the Razr ... they were doing fine, and just didn't see the smartphone revolution coming until it was too late.)
Yeah, I don't use python myself. And that's a big part of why.
"Continuity of literature, documentation,..."
Yeah, nobody is going to lose any sleep over a footnote that says "The manager worker or pattern used to be called master / slave or whatever they end up with.
"APIs, and working code?"
Existing APIs and code can continue to use it until they get retired. Its not like its a python keyword or something. From what I can see this was a documentation and code samples update; so its not in the docs and example code.
Much ado about nothing.
"What happens to those who want to keep master and slave get fired"
Why would anyone "want" to keep it? That's my point.
While I personally don't think its something worth fussing over; and I get that a minority of people are upset about it -- what I don't get is: who are these people that care so much to keep it?
Its not some orwellion doublespeak where I'm being told to beleive and repeat a lie; and it would be a principled stance to stand against it.
What "principled stance" are they trying to make by insisting we must keep call a design pattern "master" and "slave" instead of 'manager/worker' or something?
Who will refuse to just 'roll with it' to the point that it gets them fired? What's the point? What is the reasoning for that?
I'm firmly in the camp that thinks this is much ado about nothing.
But in the spirit of it being much ado about nothing, it seems absurd for me to get worked up about it. So if let them try to change it if it makes them feel better... if it gets traction and sticks... fine, whatever.
"A large part of science and engineering research is being able to convey your findings to other - through written papers and presentations."
Yes. And we work in teams. And not everyone on the team is able to do presentations, and that's not a problem. The TEAM definitely needs someone who can present well, but not everyone on the team needs to be a presenter.
There are 2 elements to consider here:
1) A students score in an academic subject should not depend on their public speaking comfort and performance. Think about that. It makes good sense. Why does your science research project mark depend on 'eye contact' and not saying 'um' ? That's as ridiculous an grading a mathematics assignment on your singing voice and fashion sense.
2) Public speaking, and speaking in front of others is an important life skill and students need to learn how to do it; and should not be excused from doing it, even if it makes them uncomfortable.
Reconciling this really shouldn't be that hard. Separate the academic marks from the public speaking/presentation marks. Your science mark is what you know in science. Offer separate classes in public speaking and debate etc. Still HAVE the science presentations though, but apply your science presentation "presentation performance" mark to the other course. So no matter how badly you blow the presentation performance it doesn't affect your science mark; that's graded on the content you hand in.
People with anxiety will struggle in this 2ndary course; but at least it doesn't affect their academic marks. I'd say this 2ndary course should be mandatory -- public speaking is an important life skill that people need to do, but i extreme cases could be excused.
"Apple's Legal documents are written in plain English. Maybe it is YOU that needs some tutoring on the subject."
It's still 56 pages worth which is pretty excessive to "buy" a $10 movie.
Especially when I can go to the store and buy a movie, give them $10, and they give me a movie.
Right. If I understood it right, 'Imposter syndrome' is more the latter; where you are genuinely competent; but nevertheless fear you don't measure up and are worried others will find out... despite you being reasonably competent.
But its not that you aren't "smart" enough to recognize you are competent, instead its more on the irrational anxiety/paranoia spectrum.
At any rate its a really weird article because it doesn't seem to differentiate between the Socratic wisdom you cite and and the anxiety 'syndrome'. The vast majority of people don't have 'imposter syndrome', they're just bona fide bullshitting their way around and they know it. And that's NOT imposter syndrome.