My most memorable classes were not lectures. The purpose of textbooks and assigned reading was to transfer the fundamental information. Homework from the textbook gave you an opportunity to gauge whether or not you were actually learning the material and your ability to apply the processes described by the text. Classrooms were a place to first have a pop quiz (a great way to really gauge if you have retained and/or truly comprehend what you have been learning), then to discuss the reading assignment (Socratic method), and if applicable, engage in a demonstration or skill-building activity.
The only question is: will they be US intelligence agencies or Chinese intelligence agencies? Or have the two world powers finally merged to form the top secret Sole Power of Ex-Communists and Republicans Empire, aka S.P.E.C.T.R.E?
Yes, but if he tries he will learn a lot about software engineering and project management, skills that go way beyond basic coding; skills that employers are hiring for. Being totally self-driven would just be icing on the cake. I would however suggest a slight modification to the "break it down" strategy. And that is, write modular programs that can work with the other programs you write but could also each function as a stand-alone program. You still need to decide what direction you want to take your programming. If you want to write financial software, you could write several modules that perform specific financial functions and then a top-level program that integrates the individual modules as sub-routines. Or write the firmware for an intelligent battery charger, and keep adding functions, like a USB driver to interface the charger with other devices, and then add a display to the charger and write the code for that, and then write a program to log events, then a program to graphically display the charging history, etc. etc. Just start with a project that is potentially simple enough, like a quick and dirty operating system, and keep expanding on it until it becomes as over bloated as MS Windows has become today.
I'm not going to condemn you for this. My own perceptions of what I would be doing with my engineering degree turned out to be so far off target that it's not even funny. I'm not working on the stuff that fascinated me. I'm working on the stuff my boss lets me do. I try to find the "joy of engineering" when and where I can, but it is very difficult to earn a living, raise a family, have the intrinsic qualifications and market demand to pursue one's very specific interests. I suspect that many other readers here would agree.
Nobody knows WHO "invented" bitcoin. Odds are fair that bitcoin is just another NSA program to track those who are seeking to remain anonymous. Who else with a decent R&D budget would fund such a project without taking credit for it, raising awareness for their cause, or making a profit from the effort?
The enemy wants to take away your freedom. The only way to stop them is to dominate, track and control every facet of life. You do believe in protecting freedom now, don't you?
There are no "fast lanes" on Florida's highways. There is one lane for driving and one lane for passing. Staying in the passing lane while not attempting to actually pass a vehicle and returning to the driving lane is illegal, regardless of speed. Regardless of their motivation, anyone who gets into the passing lane and remains there with the intent to impede the flow of traffic is not a "safety advocate" or "vigilante", they are just a_holes.
And yet the economy and civilization in Europe remained in the dark ages after the fall of Rome until the Renaissance, at just about the same time that Portuguese explorers discovered dark skinned laborers from Africa. At that time slavery, and feudal serfdom, were still the order of the day, but it was not perpetual, hereditary slavery. It was indentured servitude, and the slave had a hope of buying his freedom or securing the freedom of his offspring. At worst case a slave could run away and still blend in throughout many parts of Caucasian Europe. This problem was solved when the Pope declared that black African heathens could be enslaved for perpetual generations. When they ran away they were much easier to spot.
After the industrial revolution it was no longer efficient to transport slaves from the third world to Europe and America, so the European powers instead focused on exploiting people of color in their own homeland through the establishment and control of colonies in Africa, India and Asia. Europe was forced to abandon control of its colonial assets to private global business conglomerates that can exploit workers more efficiently by setting low wages rather than funding expensive military and security forces to coerce labor.
And don't forget the "Holy Roman Empire" that persisted in the north, long after Byzantium was overrun by Turks. One could make the argument that Kaiser (German spelling of "Caesar") Wilhelm as the last Roman emperor.
It's worth noting also that while the "Empire" may have fallen, the barbarians who charged through the gates eventually inherited Roman civilization. From engineering to language to law, the Roman way of doing things persists to this day, with a few tweaks and improvements along the way. Very few of the unique traits of the separate barbarian tribes persist to this day, but most Europeans share a very similar Roman-style culture.
The problem is that to an economist, the Second LIfe "Linden" is just as "real" as the fiat "US dollar", which is just as "real" as a gold certificate, which is just as "real" as a brick of gold, which is just a "real" as a hamburger, which is just as "real" as a tractor factory, which is just as "real" as a soybean farm.
For an economist information is an exploitable resource, as is microprocessor capacity and memory capacity. As long as more trade can take place for digital resources it will be conceivably possible to continue economic growth for a long time to come, even while a huge portion of the planet's population dies off in mass starvation.
For this reason I prefer to separate the concepts of "economy" from "physical economy" or "human ecology". What's good for the "economy" is not always good for the rest of us.
If you want specifics, then how about just two possible scenarios:
1. Major disruption in the supply of semiconductors. If war were to break out between China and N.Korea against S.Korea, Taiwan, and Japan, the entire world's production of semiconductors could be disrupted or shut off. Best case in such a scenario is that only critical equipment would be supplied until foundries could ramp up production in other countries. But ramping up semiconductor production isn't as quick or straight forward as hiring a few good managers, engineers, or production staff. It could take years to rebuild our semiconductor infrastructure, presuming we could afford the wait. Unlike many other technologies, this isn't one that we can throw together in a garage. The supply chain for semiconductors is incredibly complex, and given China's near domination of rare earth elements, any geopolitical standoff involving China could cause a major ripple effect across the global economy. Shortages of microchips could be weathered in the short term, but if dragged on for a year or more there could be real problems affecting any device that required a chip to function properly. These days, that's just about everything, from cars to home appliances to industrial automatic, ovens, furnaces, machine tools, etc. If our entire planet had to retool for analog controls and paper-based IT, it could lead to a long-term economic decline that could thrust us into a multi-century dark age, presuming civilization doesn't collapse entirely.
2. Peak Oil. I don't think I need to elaborate on this scenario, as it has been extensively discussed elsewhere.
More likely than not, a crisis in the supply of oil or microchips, rare earth elements, or oil could result in shortages of all three critical resources. I think that the OP's comment regarding our closed ecosystem is valid. If our population is sustainable and we are not too heavily dependent on technology or geopolitical stability, then we can weather a crisis and come through in tact. But if we are completely dependent oil, technology and a global supply chain just to feed our massive population, then we could be facing some serious trouble when the next big crisis hits. In this scenario a regional catastrophe could trigger a global catastrophe.
We still live on a physical planet and have physical needs. Just because we have a growing economy in arts and entertainment, and new apps to help us manage our social lives does not mean we do not face serious growth risks in the physical economy (ie human ecology).
Do you have any idea how many scholars and academics earn their living writing literature and creating works of art for the sole purpose of having other scholars and academics review, critique, and interpret their work, all while getting paid to sell textbooks that they write, and paid to tell students how important those works are to read and study?
By pointing out the lunacy of this system you are endangering an entire sub-culture and way of life. They could have you burned at the stake as a heretic.
Hold on - are you saying the government will PAY you to be homeless? Or is it just one of those programs that is only available in blue states? Do you just have to be homeless to qualify, or do you also have to be an honorably discharged disabled vet with minor children?
But they are nowhere near as bad as those passive-aggressive homeless folks that just sleep quietly on a park bench. I can't stand how they dig through trash cans looking for food or scrap metal - right in front of me! I can tell they do it just to put me through a guilt trip in an attempt to trick me into offering them some kind of help. What nerve!
What really makes me mad though is when I'm feeding pigeons at the park and some homeless guy starts picking up and eating the crumbs that were meant for the pigeons. Homeless people in the park these days just take all of the fun out of enjoying open space that my taxes pay for.
Just look to Libya if you want to see what happens when a poorly armed populace rises up against an oppressive military regime. The key though is numbers. In Syria rebels don't have quite the same level of support as rebels in Libya. Libya eventually received air support, arms and training from the West whereas the West is wary of supporting tomorrow's Bin Ladins. Syria also has a lot of outside support from Hezbollah and Iran, while Libya depended mostly on mercenaries from Sub-Saharan Africa.
So, fundamentally, an autocratic ruler cannot rely on tanks and bombs alone to subdue a major popular uprising.
Not all supporters of gun rights are conservative. I consider myself armed and liberal, and agree with the following quote:
"Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary." - Karl Marx.
At least half of the "middle class" should make more than the median income. But we have a lot of laws that provide special protections and subsidies for those with below median incomes, or for those living near or below the poverty line. I just don't think that consumer protections for all should be given such a low priority over helping families in dire need. Even after Obamacare coming into affect, middle class families can end up losing most of their life savings after just one major medical event. The outlook is worse for any family with a member who is chronically or terminally ill. People with moderate incomes are still forced to file divorce against a spouse that they love because otherwise their spouse would not qualify for nursing care assistance. A family that is already receiving food stamps and subsidized housing isn't hardly affected by a $600, $6,000, or $60,0000 hospital or nursing home bill. Just about anyone with below-median income can file chapter 7 bankruptcy and wipe out debt with a fresh clean start. But if a middle class family just barely exceeds median income for their area then the whole family has to pay 100% of their "disposable" income for either five years or until the debt is paid in full. If they have other expenses, like a car or home repair, and if this causes them to fall behind on their five year payment plan, the case can be dismissed, and they will owe the full debt plus interest. This middle class family would be allowed about $700/month to feed a family of four. If both parents work 60 or 70 uncompensated (ie salary) hours each week, then there isn't much time to prepare cheap meals from scratch.
The attitude in government is to either promote industry or to help the destitute. But there are increasingly more risks today to hard working families that can lose everything they've been working for. We should have more policies that protect the present status of middle class families rather than waiting for them to lose everything first before getting any help. Ending the sense of entitlement that hospital administrators have for the net worth of their patient's families would go a long way.
As our society is very litigious compared to most other countries, families are incurring legal expenses over matters that should be dealt with in ways that would be much less expensive. If my ex-wife is dating a registered sex-offender, it should only take a conversation with local law enforcement to halt visitations until the sex-offender is out of the picture. It should not take $30k in legal fees and a couple trips to court.
I could go on about restrictions that prevent families from starting a business, or saving money by doing certain repairs without paying fee after fee for permits, permissions, licenses, etc. for some of the most mundane activities. The middle class has it good - when they can actually keep most of the wealth they generate. But no one is going to bat for the middle class, so we are slowly losing protections we once had, losing freedoms we once had, and are facing greater risks of losing middle class status.
Slashdot Mirror
And don't forget the screen doors. The EM emissions just pass through like water through a sieve.
My most memorable classes were not lectures. The purpose of textbooks and assigned reading was to transfer the fundamental information. Homework from the textbook gave you an opportunity to gauge whether or not you were actually learning the material and your ability to apply the processes described by the text. Classrooms were a place to first have a pop quiz (a great way to really gauge if you have retained and/or truly comprehend what you have been learning), then to discuss the reading assignment (Socratic method), and if applicable, engage in a demonstration or skill-building activity.
The only question is: will they be US intelligence agencies or Chinese intelligence agencies? Or have the two world powers finally merged to form the top secret Sole Power of Ex-Communists and Republicans Empire, aka S.P.E.C.T.R.E?
Data wants to be free, free as a billionaire fleeing a Belize murder rap.
Yes, but if he tries he will learn a lot about software engineering and project management, skills that go way beyond basic coding; skills that employers are hiring for. Being totally self-driven would just be icing on the cake. I would however suggest a slight modification to the "break it down" strategy. And that is, write modular programs that can work with the other programs you write but could also each function as a stand-alone program. You still need to decide what direction you want to take your programming. If you want to write financial software, you could write several modules that perform specific financial functions and then a top-level program that integrates the individual modules as sub-routines. Or write the firmware for an intelligent battery charger, and keep adding functions, like a USB driver to interface the charger with other devices, and then add a display to the charger and write the code for that, and then write a program to log events, then a program to graphically display the charging history, etc. etc. Just start with a project that is potentially simple enough, like a quick and dirty operating system, and keep expanding on it until it becomes as over bloated as MS Windows has become today.
I'm not going to condemn you for this. My own perceptions of what I would be doing with my engineering degree turned out to be so far off target that it's not even funny. I'm not working on the stuff that fascinated me. I'm working on the stuff my boss lets me do. I try to find the "joy of engineering" when and where I can, but it is very difficult to earn a living, raise a family, have the intrinsic qualifications and market demand to pursue one's very specific interests. I suspect that many other readers here would agree.
You're immature and naive if you believe that Democrats aren't being paid by the same corporate lobbyists to pursue the exact same agenda.
Nobody knows WHO "invented" bitcoin. Odds are fair that bitcoin is just another NSA program to track those who are seeking to remain anonymous. Who else with a decent R&D budget would fund such a project without taking credit for it, raising awareness for their cause, or making a profit from the effort?
The enemy wants to take away your freedom. The only way to stop them is to dominate, track and control every facet of life. You do believe in protecting freedom now, don't you?
It would like kind of like Puerto Rico, but more high-tech.
I prefer the Swiss bank secrecy laws.
There are no "fast lanes" on Florida's highways. There is one lane for driving and one lane for passing. Staying in the passing lane while not attempting to actually pass a vehicle and returning to the driving lane is illegal, regardless of speed. Regardless of their motivation, anyone who gets into the passing lane and remains there with the intent to impede the flow of traffic is not a "safety advocate" or "vigilante", they are just a_holes.
This is Florida, and I think you just quoted almost verbatim the state's "Stand Your Ground" law.
I'd be happy if the airbag in the passenger seat would just shut up, with our without a cell phone or a deadman's switch.
And yet the economy and civilization in Europe remained in the dark ages after the fall of Rome until the Renaissance, at just about the same time that Portuguese explorers discovered dark skinned laborers from Africa. At that time slavery, and feudal serfdom, were still the order of the day, but it was not perpetual, hereditary slavery. It was indentured servitude, and the slave had a hope of buying his freedom or securing the freedom of his offspring. At worst case a slave could run away and still blend in throughout many parts of Caucasian Europe. This problem was solved when the Pope declared that black African heathens could be enslaved for perpetual generations. When they ran away they were much easier to spot.
After the industrial revolution it was no longer efficient to transport slaves from the third world to Europe and America, so the European powers instead focused on exploiting people of color in their own homeland through the establishment and control of colonies in Africa, India and Asia. Europe was forced to abandon control of its colonial assets to private global business conglomerates that can exploit workers more efficiently by setting low wages rather than funding expensive military and security forces to coerce labor.
And don't forget the "Holy Roman Empire" that persisted in the north, long after Byzantium was overrun by Turks. One could make the argument that Kaiser (German spelling of "Caesar") Wilhelm as the last Roman emperor.
It's worth noting also that while the "Empire" may have fallen, the barbarians who charged through the gates eventually inherited Roman civilization. From engineering to language to law, the Roman way of doing things persists to this day, with a few tweaks and improvements along the way. Very few of the unique traits of the separate barbarian tribes persist to this day, but most Europeans share a very similar Roman-style culture.
So, when he said "render unto Caesar that which is Caesars" he was actually claiming entitlement to both tax and tithe? Interesting.
The problem is that to an economist, the Second LIfe "Linden" is just as "real" as the fiat "US dollar", which is just as "real" as a gold certificate, which is just as "real" as a brick of gold, which is just a "real" as a hamburger, which is just as "real" as a tractor factory, which is just as "real" as a soybean farm.
For an economist information is an exploitable resource, as is microprocessor capacity and memory capacity. As long as more trade can take place for digital resources it will be conceivably possible to continue economic growth for a long time to come, even while a huge portion of the planet's population dies off in mass starvation.
For this reason I prefer to separate the concepts of "economy" from "physical economy" or "human ecology". What's good for the "economy" is not always good for the rest of us.
If you want specifics, then how about just two possible scenarios:
1. Major disruption in the supply of semiconductors. If war were to break out between China and N.Korea against S.Korea, Taiwan, and Japan, the entire world's production of semiconductors could be disrupted or shut off. Best case in such a scenario is that only critical equipment would be supplied until foundries could ramp up production in other countries. But ramping up semiconductor production isn't as quick or straight forward as hiring a few good managers, engineers, or production staff. It could take years to rebuild our semiconductor infrastructure, presuming we could afford the wait. Unlike many other technologies, this isn't one that we can throw together in a garage. The supply chain for semiconductors is incredibly complex, and given China's near domination of rare earth elements, any geopolitical standoff involving China could cause a major ripple effect across the global economy. Shortages of microchips could be weathered in the short term, but if dragged on for a year or more there could be real problems affecting any device that required a chip to function properly. These days, that's just about everything, from cars to home appliances to industrial automatic, ovens, furnaces, machine tools, etc. If our entire planet had to retool for analog controls and paper-based IT, it could lead to a long-term economic decline that could thrust us into a multi-century dark age, presuming civilization doesn't collapse entirely.
2. Peak Oil. I don't think I need to elaborate on this scenario, as it has been extensively discussed elsewhere.
More likely than not, a crisis in the supply of oil or microchips, rare earth elements, or oil could result in shortages of all three critical resources. I think that the OP's comment regarding our closed ecosystem is valid. If our population is sustainable and we are not too heavily dependent on technology or geopolitical stability, then we can weather a crisis and come through in tact. But if we are completely dependent oil, technology and a global supply chain just to feed our massive population, then we could be facing some serious trouble when the next big crisis hits. In this scenario a regional catastrophe could trigger a global catastrophe.
We still live on a physical planet and have physical needs. Just because we have a growing economy in arts and entertainment, and new apps to help us manage our social lives does not mean we do not face serious growth risks in the physical economy (ie human ecology).
Do you have any idea how many scholars and academics earn their living writing literature and creating works of art for the sole purpose of having other scholars and academics review, critique, and interpret their work, all while getting paid to sell textbooks that they write, and paid to tell students how important those works are to read and study?
By pointing out the lunacy of this system you are endangering an entire sub-culture and way of life. They could have you burned at the stake as a heretic.
Hold on - are you saying the government will PAY you to be homeless? Or is it just one of those programs that is only available in blue states? Do you just have to be homeless to qualify, or do you also have to be an honorably discharged disabled vet with minor children?
But they are nowhere near as bad as those passive-aggressive homeless folks that just sleep quietly on a park bench. I can't stand how they dig through trash cans looking for food or scrap metal - right in front of me! I can tell they do it just to put me through a guilt trip in an attempt to trick me into offering them some kind of help. What nerve!
What really makes me mad though is when I'm feeding pigeons at the park and some homeless guy starts picking up and eating the crumbs that were meant for the pigeons. Homeless people in the park these days just take all of the fun out of enjoying open space that my taxes pay for.
Just look to Libya if you want to see what happens when a poorly armed populace rises up against an oppressive military regime. The key though is numbers. In Syria rebels don't have quite the same level of support as rebels in Libya. Libya eventually received air support, arms and training from the West whereas the West is wary of supporting tomorrow's Bin Ladins. Syria also has a lot of outside support from Hezbollah and Iran, while Libya depended mostly on mercenaries from Sub-Saharan Africa.
So, fundamentally, an autocratic ruler cannot rely on tanks and bombs alone to subdue a major popular uprising.
Not all supporters of gun rights are conservative. I consider myself armed and liberal, and agree with the following quote:
"Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary." - Karl Marx.
At least half of the "middle class" should make more than the median income. But we have a lot of laws that provide special protections and subsidies for those with below median incomes, or for those living near or below the poverty line. I just don't think that consumer protections for all should be given such a low priority over helping families in dire need. Even after Obamacare coming into affect, middle class families can end up losing most of their life savings after just one major medical event. The outlook is worse for any family with a member who is chronically or terminally ill. People with moderate incomes are still forced to file divorce against a spouse that they love because otherwise their spouse would not qualify for nursing care assistance. A family that is already receiving food stamps and subsidized housing isn't hardly affected by a $600, $6,000, or $60,0000 hospital or nursing home bill. Just about anyone with below-median income can file chapter 7 bankruptcy and wipe out debt with a fresh clean start. But if a middle class family just barely exceeds median income for their area then the whole family has to pay 100% of their "disposable" income for either five years or until the debt is paid in full. If they have other expenses, like a car or home repair, and if this causes them to fall behind on their five year payment plan, the case can be dismissed, and they will owe the full debt plus interest. This middle class family would be allowed about $700/month to feed a family of four. If both parents work 60 or 70 uncompensated (ie salary) hours each week, then there isn't much time to prepare cheap meals from scratch.
The attitude in government is to either promote industry or to help the destitute. But there are increasingly more risks today to hard working families that can lose everything they've been working for. We should have more policies that protect the present status of middle class families rather than waiting for them to lose everything first before getting any help. Ending the sense of entitlement that hospital administrators have for the net worth of their patient's families would go a long way.
As our society is very litigious compared to most other countries, families are incurring legal expenses over matters that should be dealt with in ways that would be much less expensive. If my ex-wife is dating a registered sex-offender, it should only take a conversation with local law enforcement to halt visitations until the sex-offender is out of the picture. It should not take $30k in legal fees and a couple trips to court.
I could go on about restrictions that prevent families from starting a business, or saving money by doing certain repairs without paying fee after fee for permits, permissions, licenses, etc. for some of the most mundane activities. The middle class has it good - when they can actually keep most of the wealth they generate. But no one is going to bat for the middle class, so we are slowly losing protections we once had, losing freedoms we once had, and are facing greater risks of losing middle class status.