After seeing my development job outsourced to India in the early 2000's during an IT slump, I have no compulsion to steer my daughter into STEM. I hope she finds a career that she grows into and does well, STEM or not.
STEM is in demand at this spot in history, but I've learned the hard way it's subject to fads, bubbles, age discrimination, H1B's, and outsourcing.
Please tell me, why push women into such risk?
I suspect it's lobbyists trying to get cheaper IT labor for their plutocrat bosses by flooding the market. Feel welcome to convince me otherwise.
Do what the Brits do: create some fun and fanciful traditional-like uniform for the guards, and post 2 guards near the front gate, 2 near the front door, and one on each corner of the building.
Interesting point. But, what exactly is a "horse company"? Did stage-coach builders go out of business, or bought out by ever-merging car companies for manufacturing the non-engine portion of cars? Manufacturing a stage-coach is not that much different from the cars of the time such that buying an existing factory would seem a better bet than starting from scratch.
It would be interesting to study the patterns of disrupting technologies on the fading product companies. Anybody know a good book on that? Our times are further complicated by the offshoring factor.
About 10 years ago I studied a graph of the cost of solar versus conventional energy over time, extrapolated out, and saw them crossing in roughly 10 years. So, I invested in solar companies thinking they are going to take over conventional energy.
I got the crossing part right. What I got wrong is that those were domestic companies. Chinese companies generally have beaten domestic companies such that my stocks languished.
Predicting the future is not good enough; you have to predict the location also. Warren Buffet, I am not.
In different words, you agree then that this comet landing was not actually a success.
I don't see how that follows from the quoted text.
Regarding the harpoon, many "successful" US missions also had problem spots. For example, Galileo's main antenna didn't open, greatly limiting imaging data, but still did lots of other measurements. And its atmosphere probe had a key part on backward, but got lucky and still managed to work. Voyager's antenna boom kept shifting around, missing some key shots. Pioneer 10 and 11 got confused by Jupiter's radiation and missed a couple of moon photos. Viking 2's seismometer didn't work. Apollo 11's guidance computer got swamped with processing jobs and stopped working. Spirit's memory got full, stopping all work for a couple of weeks.
There is no AAA out there: you improvise and cross your fingers.
(Sharknado III should actually do that. Some military experiment using armed sharks goes awry in the Quantum Whirlpool tank, and flying, zapping sharks are everywhere. Sure it's silly, but so was Sharknado I.)
They're trying to dress it up and say it was a success, but you just can't put lipstick on a pig.
Hey, they've done something that nobody has done before. Kudos are in order. Low-gravity landings on giant loose lint-balls are still new territory.
The amount of science returned is still unknown because they are still sifting the data. At the very least, they got close-up photos of the surface of a comet for geologists to study.
I hope they take their lessons and make a better comet mission.
Remember, the US Ranger program took 7 tries before they had success. The comet mission had partial success on the first try! Practice makes perfect.
Perhaps they can make the next one spherical and not require any particular landing orientation. Put wire-frame bumpers on it and let it go ahead and bounce. It can adjust its angle after a landing.
This is why older workers in IT get discriminated against -- younger people seize on the buzzword and deride the older folks for patiently explaining that it's all been done before.
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. To catch up on all the latest buzzword speaking patterns, just buy a copy of Learn Parallel Embedded 3D Internet of Things with HTML5 and XML for Head First Dummies Unleashed in 7 Days....by Dice.com;-)
If that doesn't work, just paste the title on your resume (minus the "Dummy" stuff) after they boot you for being old.
Maybe I'm becoming a "Get off my linear lawn!" curmudgeon, but I've yet to see sufficiently common "cubicle programmer" scenarios that show the net benefits of parallel programming (PP).
PP is fairly hard to test and get right such that the human labor is often more than the machine labor savings. And common PP needs tend to eventually get folded into declarative or semi-declarative API's or interfaces, such as RDBMS and browsers/renderers based off of SQL and markup. The database and the browser manage the PP under the hood so that custom application developers don't have to. Maybe the cutting edge or the high-end can always take advantage of such, but most developers don't fall into that. (I don't dispute PP having solid niches, but they are still niches.)
I've asked for realistic examples on various forums, and so far they were pretty weak justifications, rare situations, or a niche need.
Sometimes I get the "Ayn Rand" argument: If you don't squeeze every ounce of speed out of the machine, then you will be replaced by those who can". But typically companies don't want code that is difficult to understand or manage unless the speed advantage really matters. Slow machines are an annoyance, but confused staff developers can result in apps not working at all. It's usually cheaper to buy a new, faster server than fire your developers and retrain a new set on all your shop's stuff.
And often the bottlenecks are fixable by tuning existing linear processes, or farming large-volume processing to a RDBMS (which can use parallelism under the hood. Those building systems software tools like RDBMS will need to know PP well, but that's usually been the case for decades.)
Wouldn't a breach turn it into an "unclassified" system? Is "classified" based on intent, or on who actually knows? (Where's that Security Terminology Lawyer when you need him/her?)
Slashdot Mirror
First post!
After seeing my development job outsourced to India in the early 2000's during an IT slump, I have no compulsion to steer my daughter into STEM. I hope she finds a career that she grows into and does well, STEM or not.
STEM is in demand at this spot in history, but I've learned the hard way it's subject to fads, bubbles, age discrimination, H1B's, and outsourcing.
Please tell me, why push women into such risk?
I suspect it's lobbyists trying to get cheaper IT labor for their plutocrat bosses by flooding the market. Feel welcome to convince me otherwise.
Your rudeness is not appreciated.
Heavy? Not compared to a battery. Quote: "...a single kilogram of this isotope emits around 500 Watts of power. "
Do what the Brits do: create some fun and fanciful traditional-like uniform for the guards, and post 2 guards near the front gate, 2 near the front door, and one on each corner of the building.
Maybe something like this:
http://www.halloweencostumes.c...
(Without the boyish face, though.)
Interesting point. But, what exactly is a "horse company"? Did stage-coach builders go out of business, or bought out by ever-merging car companies for manufacturing the non-engine portion of cars? Manufacturing a stage-coach is not that much different from the cars of the time such that buying an existing factory would seem a better bet than starting from scratch.
It would be interesting to study the patterns of disrupting technologies on the fading product companies. Anybody know a good book on that? Our times are further complicated by the offshoring factor.
Sociopaths exist!
(As do blunt trolls)
It actually worked a year ago. They didn't shut down paying accounts until recently.
About 10 years ago I studied a graph of the cost of solar versus conventional energy over time, extrapolated out, and saw them crossing in roughly 10 years. So, I invested in solar companies thinking they are going to take over conventional energy.
I got the crossing part right. What I got wrong is that those were domestic companies. Chinese companies generally have beaten domestic companies such that my stocks languished.
Predicting the future is not good enough; you have to predict the location also. Warren Buffet, I am not.
What's the difference between "function or method call" and "message passing"?
Leave it to BSD crowd to find 100 different ways to say "RTFM".
Actually, I would have remembered the existence of it, but my vertical occipital fasciculus gave out.
I don't see how that follows from the quoted text.
Regarding the harpoon, many "successful" US missions also had problem spots. For example, Galileo's main antenna didn't open, greatly limiting imaging data, but still did lots of other measurements. And its atmosphere probe had a key part on backward, but got lucky and still managed to work. Voyager's antenna boom kept shifting around, missing some key shots. Pioneer 10 and 11 got confused by Jupiter's radiation and missed a couple of moon photos. Viking 2's seismometer didn't work. Apollo 11's guidance computer got swamped with processing jobs and stopped working. Spirit's memory got full, stopping all work for a couple of weeks.
There is no AAA out there: you improvise and cross your fingers.
unfortunately, goat-se isn't among of them
Sharknado.....with quantum lasers on their heads!
(Sharknado III should actually do that. Some military experiment using armed sharks goes awry in the Quantum Whirlpool tank, and flying, zapping sharks are everywhere. Sure it's silly, but so was Sharknado I.)
That's like comparing apples to peacocks.
But spinning sh$t is not ADA compliant and will get us sued.
That's easy, opposite of west.
Hey, they've done something that nobody has done before. Kudos are in order. Low-gravity landings on giant loose lint-balls are still new territory.
The amount of science returned is still unknown because they are still sifting the data. At the very least, they got close-up photos of the surface of a comet for geologists to study.
I hope they take their lessons and make a better comet mission.
Remember, the US Ranger program took 7 tries before they had success. The comet mission had partial success on the first try! Practice makes perfect.
Perhaps they can make the next one spherical and not require any particular landing orientation. Put wire-frame bumpers on it and let it go ahead and bounce. It can adjust its angle after a landing.
Just hire a pinball wizard to figure it all out.
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. To catch up on all the latest buzzword speaking patterns, just buy a copy of Learn Parallel Embedded 3D Internet of Things with HTML5 and XML for Head First Dummies Unleashed in 7 Days....by Dice.com ;-)
If that doesn't work, just paste the title on your resume (minus the "Dummy" stuff) after they boot you for being old.
Maybe I'm becoming a "Get off my linear lawn!" curmudgeon, but I've yet to see sufficiently common "cubicle programmer" scenarios that show the net benefits of parallel programming (PP).
PP is fairly hard to test and get right such that the human labor is often more than the machine labor savings. And common PP needs tend to eventually get folded into declarative or semi-declarative API's or interfaces, such as RDBMS and browsers/renderers based off of SQL and markup. The database and the browser manage the PP under the hood so that custom application developers don't have to. Maybe the cutting edge or the high-end can always take advantage of such, but most developers don't fall into that. (I don't dispute PP having solid niches, but they are still niches.)
I've asked for realistic examples on various forums, and so far they were pretty weak justifications, rare situations, or a niche need.
Sometimes I get the "Ayn Rand" argument: If you don't squeeze every ounce of speed out of the machine, then you will be replaced by those who can". But typically companies don't want code that is difficult to understand or manage unless the speed advantage really matters. Slow machines are an annoyance, but confused staff developers can result in apps not working at all. It's usually cheaper to buy a new, faster server than fire your developers and retrain a new set on all your shop's stuff.
And often the bottlenecks are fixable by tuning existing linear processes, or farming large-volume processing to a RDBMS (which can use parallelism under the hood. Those building systems software tools like RDBMS will need to know PP well, but that's usually been the case for decades.)
Wouldn't a breach turn it into an "unclassified" system? Is "classified" based on intent, or on who actually knows? (Where's that Security Terminology Lawyer when you need him/her?)
But then they deploy sharks with laser-beams on their heads to swim the signals closer. It's all nicely planned out.
"I get my Internet from SharkNet[TM]. It works better during rain and tornadoes."