By definition industry needs something different from what universities provide. That is so because universities teach about things that do exist already not about things that are being developed now (some of them do research too but that is not teaching). The role of a school was always to provide the base on which one can build. The role of a company in it is to provide means to build and such foundations. Instead of complaining they should use talent and skills that are at place.
I thought that is what the companies normally do. Maybe if the common practice in the industry were not short term profit and black mailing with skilled labour in cheap countries there would be more young people willing to do something else except managing portfolios and takeovers,suing other people and making silicon implants.
From all my encounters with people where religion played any role I realized that there are three sorts of people: 1. the ones that believe in divine entity of some kind 2. the ones that believe there is no devine entity of any kind. 3. the rest that does not have feelings strong enough to involve itself in such discussion.
as for third group nothing can be said about their beliefs but the other two have strong feeling in this area. What I am trying to say is this: whether you believe in god, devine entity or any such thing or you oppose them you are still a subject to relgious lunacy. The reason is the hormonal coctail you have in you head. Or do you know any person whose brain does not work with 'a unique hormonal brew'?
Such discussions are so heated not because of the question but because everybody has an answer already preprogrammed in their heads (belief). Only few realize that such beliefs do not constitute a proof either way as there cannot be proof.
there is no such a thing as a computer scientist. Neither a software engineer exists. If they are any different from unicorn then they are extinct or almost extinct creatures and probably live in China (in Schanghai's Zoo ???). Of course it is not a big wonder that this is the case as if youlook around you will notice that for instance these days it is widely believed that to write good quality software one needs a bit of glass pearls to pay for work in some underdeveloped country, some fluffy idea of what needs to be done and few days of time. Possibly internet access for your slaves so that they can google the solution out of the web but I guess that may be a luxury already. Starting with a huge staff in the west and laying them off brings the share price sky high and a nice bonus to the manager too.
You see there is a reason why young people in the west of Europe do not want to do technical studies. It is difficult, you can make your hands dirty, your brain could overheat and it allows you to enjoy blackmailing (designers in Somalia are much cheaper than you) every time your manager needs a bonus for saving 1k rupia. That their in years time acuried knowledge is not worth a thing because you do not know the new buzz words or newest abbreviation is another motivation of course.
Maybe you should have become lowyer or mercenary??? I personally like the idea of mercenary - if my boss went on a path of apparent self destruction (by offering me career change possibility for instance) I could have shoot him in the head and sell his kidneys (there is no market value in oposit handling).
Being anengineer in completly different industry I know nothing about building houses. I bought one recetly however and then I had to do number of things myself (the budget was limited so I had to). I found a lot of information on the internet and book store but its quality was bad: the info was either incomplete, not accurate or so scattered that it was really questionable whether one could learn usefull things this way. At the end I succeeded but I had to learn the hard way (is there any other?) and it took me more time than I predicted. I can imagine that it would have taken me much less time if I had had a guidance. That is exactly where univesities excell - they provide you concetrated source of information and guidance. Information you can find in internet but guidance is much more difficult to find.
Once you aquire your degree however, you will notice that it is not a degree that makes an engineer. It is a hard heart and hard work that do.
You do not need a direct conflict between the major powers to continue the more or less efficient killing: Vietnam, Korea, Darfur, Red Khmer and their fascinating philosophy, Rwanda etc. You do not even need a modern technology to do it really well - in Rwanda major technological breakthrough needed to slaughter half a million people within few weeks was a production of machetes on industrial scale. So yes some people learned that direct military confrontation is not always the best way of doing business especially if the other side has millions of soldiers, no respect for human life (on whicever side) and sizable arsenal of WMD to underline its policy. The 'small' scale killing done directly by own military forces or by proxy still goes on and will do for foreseeable future.
The bottom line is: can you trust your government to use the killing power in sensible and just way? If you can then providing them means to do so is just and sensible. If not it does not matter really as you have other problems to be dealth with first. You will need military power at least for as long as long some lunatics (like the ones in Iran or N.Korea) hang on to (WMD equipped) power. You will need one as long as you have leaders believing in war as politics by other means.
Well I second that. I see no reason why the new technologies cannot help democracy to return to its roots i.e. everybody could and should take part in decision process. Just in case people forgot: partof decision making is discussion on available options, methods and leadership among other things. Of course size matters here so the state organisations (big) cannot have their daily life led by democracy but the goals, the way to achieve them and the leadership that leads us there should be decided in a process at least approaching democratic way. What we have now in majority of western 'democracies' is a sad joke (yes I know there are people less fortunate than we are and not even majority of them live in N.Korea) based on the fact that it was not possible to vote for anything else than your representatives (who then could do what they wanted for few years). Now we have the technology to democratize our societies again - maybe we should use the chance. If not we who would do it for us???
I think problem here is the same as in any other area of software engineering. One need software so one saves on engineering skipping it altogether. The result is a mess. The mess can be quite some nice environment for some. Any change to this world however (un)reasonable be fought with whatever means available.
I wonder - have I succeeded in getting modded to hell now or not?
what about half of the life savings. Or third of it? Would it do? This still can push you over the border to poverty even if not immediately. Unless of course you will decide to take justice into your own hands and spend the remaining parts of your life in federal prison for murder then you will not live in poverty. Choice is yours.
No amount of new shiny compilers, languages etc will help if you start project not knowing engineering basics. part of those basics is review process:
1.design 2.review what you have done 3.if needed do rework and goto 2.
else continue 4.write a report of finished work
That it is needed avoids many. Some even are delusional enough to believe that for instance outsourcing removes need for proper design whith result that they either lose customers, lose control or both.
There are (almost) no technical problems - quality is decided where budget and methodolgy is. Once these are screwed the product is doomed. From this perspective it is cheaper to skip/refrain from development instead of developing 'flowed by design products' that do not work anyway.
This is a sign of something more. The overall lack of basic logic capability (on/. as well as in real life) is just a fact. I see it every morning when I enter my office and open my mail box. It is fascinating to see educated people telling me for instance that you do not need any documentation and review process on (software) enginering projects. It is just a question of time to see them looking for reasons of failure. Surprisingly this reason is either aliens from outer space or the messangers.
Of course one shall never confuse simple incompetence and lack of knowledge with stupidity and bad will. The former can be eradicated the later not.
Mao: according to wikipedia his policies (great leap forward & cultural revolution) caused massive deaths in tens of milions - say 25m that is 2.5% of 1 (for simplicity) bilion Stalin: killed probably dozen milion or two - that would account to less than 5% (12m out of 290m). Pol Pot killed (depending on estimation) up to 3m people from 15m that were there - that is 20%
On this scale they look like whimps now. Still they are brutal and do not tolerate different opinions. I wonder however how many citizens of this great country actually care.
I do not think Chuck does any catapulting (except for his enemies). You just need to know how to read the statistics: he is not only the peak point. The mass of his achievements is so huge that it totals more than anything the rest of humanity could do thus making the average of it close to where he is. Thus all creation (whatever sex, strength and congregation) is just in state of deviation from this ideal that he Chuck Noriss is.
I hope you understand your mistake now. Be fast and confess it aloud or Chuck will kick the . out of your /
I wonder why any new technology has to be such a hummer on existing ones and 'kill' them (more or less ) instantly? In my experience new technologies are the ones that die, not the established ones. I still use newspapers and go to cinema occasionally. I do not buy new vinyl but that is because I think I have all I want already on CD and not much new stuff is comoing about worth my money. I still listen to radio and whatever the transport technology I will continue doing so. I do not watch that match of 'traditional' TV but that is because it is crap. Why would I want more crap or for that matter more crap over IP??? Why would it matter? That I can chose what I see??? But I can do it now and I still think majority of broadcast information is crap. The crap saturation levels will increase with more channels of distribution.
What I wanted to say is the following: new technologies come and some of them change the way we do things but majority are incorporated in the way invisible (of seemingly obvious) for a common user so they change something in the way the service is delivered but not the way it is consumed.
BTW: you say that it is almost impossible to use the service as the way 'we want' and yet you say that this is going to kill traditional TV??? Not very logical, is it?
There will be time computers will be playing chess well indeed. TFA article says that they do not know when to end the game and we know they were tweaked and adjusted to play against their specific oponents. In Baduk (another game of stategy) it is even more pronounced - the programs cannot even calculate the score properly - they need assistance of a human to determine status of groups after the game ends. This brings me to a conclusion that the software playing strategy games is stil in its infacy.
OC the machines will win against humans one day. So what? Will this mean end of humanity? It could be that we end it ourselves anyway - when some lunies will get hold of home made nukes for instance or 'properly' designed bilogical agents. The whole development forces us to (re)think our perception of reality. Only few however actually do it. The rest just carry on whatever they do.
new methods are being developed for Baduk too - just recently some french scientists used montecarlo method as a basis of their engine - surprisingly the thing went on to beat even strong players on 9x9 board. I do not think it did the same on 'normal' board though.
And this has nothing to do with transition from being-young-having-time-listinging-with-interest through being-grownup-having-the-money-but-no-time-to-list en-with-interest to being-middle-aged-having-no-interest-and-hifi-equi pment-connected-to-your-tv-box-so-that-you-can-hea r-the-blusts-in-the-newest-blockbuster ??? If you have interest in what you hear you will invest money in the equipment and tracks. If you need just musical bacground (frankly majority of what is produced at any time in history is just that) then you do need neither high quality of sound nor high quality of music as you are not really listening.
As TFA says - the fast food won. It is everywhere because people do not care what they eat. The same happened with music - it got to the masses so must fit with their muscial tastes (sad as they are) as well. It is sad not because there is no good music around. It is sad because there is not so much interest in it. But was there that much of serious interest in it before? Now we just have an option to take it with us everywhere and that is the difference.
what is this silly thing about pregnancy? I thought majority of/.ers live in countries where contraceptives are easily available. Or were all the/.ers busy studing ways of using their PCs to run pr0n instead of leaning how to prevent such mistakes like unwanted pregnancy and/or STD???
strangly in cases like this a lie is not really that good for you anyway even if you do not get caught. If Clinton admited that he did what he did I guess the envy would be at least as big as the noise from so called moral guardians and such.
There is a debate of sorts (i.e. politicians do the talking) currently about german secret police and their right to spy on you in any way it sees fit - by breaking into you private computers too. Could this be a coincidence? Maybe the guy refused to talk to them and they let him know he is next to be thoroughly investigated for possible law violations.
Incidentaly abbreviation of state's name can be transalted as Banana Republik Deutschland. It fits quite well actually.
Nice observation. When I read TFA I thought - hell what theories does the author mean? Is this again another feat of modern software engineering or excuse me : 'computer science'? Something as useful as a sorting program that sorts all integers between 0 and 500 and puts them in an array, that my friends 'software engineers' had to write for their exams at the univeristy?
Of course what TFA should be saying is that it is possible to reproduce achievements of a human offspring in language aquisition now and that is really something (if true).
I am sure after a (possibly longer) while such software will be able to produce speech in quality enjoyed by renown speakers like for instance our beloved Bubba the jerk eee och sorry I did not mean to offend you Mr President - please do not send me to Cuba,plsplspls!!! Then we will be in exactly the same shit as now only the presidents will made of silicon. Difference hardly noticable.
here my.02$ 1. Voting with the wallet works if you have the choice. 2. Germany (and generally EU) is as much ruled by oligopolies as US is. 3. leaving the country is more or less difficult - it is depending on the circumstances (what you leave behind and where you going to) more or less difficult. If I go to Holland from where I am at the moment it will be a move of ~10km and I still can send my children to german school (if I was mad enough to want such a treatment for my own flesh and blood) and buy German beer, read German newspapers (my wife is German so that is important). I would not move only because of broadband access of course - but once you start thinking about it, then such thing will be one of (very) many factors you consider.
In the markets where the entry is very expensive (broadband infrastructure for instance and/or standards etc) the only hope for a customers are authorities - that sucks. It is interesting to see that monopolies have advantages too: GSM grew in popularity not least thanks to the fact that monopolies existed and enforced one prevailing standard of communication and could sell it to big and controlled markets .
Slashdot Mirror
By definition industry needs something different from what universities provide. That is so because universities teach about things that do exist already not about things that are being developed now (some of them do research too but that is not teaching). The role of a school was always to provide the base on which one can build. The role of a company in it is to provide means to build and such foundations.
Instead of complaining they should use talent and skills that are at place.
I thought that is what the companies normally do. Maybe if the common practice in the industry were not short term profit and black mailing with skilled labour in cheap countries there would be more young people willing to do something else except managing portfolios and takeovers,suing other people and making silicon implants.
From all my encounters with people where religion played any role I realized that there are three sorts of people:
1. the ones that believe in divine entity of some kind
2. the ones that believe there is no devine entity of any kind.
3. the rest that does not have feelings strong enough to involve itself in such discussion.
as for third group nothing can be said about their beliefs but the other two have strong feeling in this area.
What I am trying to say is this: whether you believe in god, devine entity or any such thing or you oppose them you are still a subject to relgious lunacy. The reason is the hormonal coctail you have in you head.
Or do you know any person whose brain does not work with 'a unique hormonal brew'?
Such discussions are so heated not because of the question but because everybody has an answer already preprogrammed in their heads (belief). Only few realize that such beliefs do not constitute a proof either way as there cannot be proof.
what morals?
what ethics?
why do you bother us with this shit?
there is no such a thing as a computer scientist. Neither a software engineer exists. If they are any different from unicorn then they are extinct or almost extinct creatures and probably live in China (in Schanghai's Zoo ???).
Of course it is not a big wonder that this is the case as if youlook around you will notice that for instance these days it is widely believed that to write good quality software one needs a bit of glass pearls to pay for work in some underdeveloped country, some fluffy idea of what needs to be done and few days of time. Possibly internet access for your slaves so that they can google the solution out of the web but I guess that may be a luxury already. Starting with a huge staff in the west and laying them off brings the share price sky high and a nice bonus to the manager too.
You see there is a reason why young people in the west of Europe do not want to do technical studies. It is difficult, you can make your hands dirty, your brain could overheat and it allows you to enjoy blackmailing (designers in Somalia are much cheaper than you) every time your manager needs a bonus for saving 1k rupia. That their in years time acuried knowledge is not worth a thing because you do not know the new buzz words or newest abbreviation is another motivation of course.
Maybe you should have become lowyer or mercenary??? I personally like the idea of mercenary - if my boss went on a path of apparent self destruction (by offering me career change possibility for instance) I could have shoot him in the head and sell his kidneys (there is no market value in oposit handling).
Once you aquire your degree however, you will notice that it is not a degree that makes an engineer. It is a hard heart and hard work that do.
This said I agree one can use modern technology to open education to more people. Everybody profits this way. Recent study of OECD seems to confirm that more educated people make life better for all - see this link: http://www.oecd.org/document/57/0,3343,en_2649_201185_39315897_1_1_1_1,00.html or look into this discussion: http://www.oecd.org/document/21/0,3343,en_2649_201185_39414933_1_1_1_1,00.html
You do not need a direct conflict between the major powers to continue the more or less efficient killing: Vietnam, Korea, Darfur, Red Khmer and their fascinating philosophy, Rwanda etc. You do not even need a modern technology to do it really well - in Rwanda major technological breakthrough needed to slaughter half a million people within few weeks was a production of machetes on industrial scale. So yes some people learned that direct military confrontation is not always the best way of doing business especially if the other side has millions of soldiers, no respect for human life (on whicever side) and sizable arsenal of WMD to underline its policy. The 'small' scale killing done directly by own military forces or by proxy still goes on and will do for foreseeable future.
The bottom line is: can you trust your government to use the killing power in sensible and just way?
If you can then providing them means to do so is just and sensible. If not it does not matter really as you have other problems to be dealth with first.
You will need military power at least for as long as long some lunatics (like the ones in Iran or N.Korea) hang on to (WMD equipped) power. You will need one as long as you have leaders believing in war as politics by other means.
Well I second that. I see no reason why the new technologies cannot help democracy to return to its roots i.e. everybody could and should take part in decision process. Just in case people forgot: partof decision making is discussion on available options, methods and leadership among other things.
Of course size matters here so the state organisations (big) cannot have their daily life led by democracy but the goals, the way to achieve them and the leadership that leads us there should be decided in a process at least approaching democratic way. What we have now in majority of western 'democracies' is a sad joke (yes I know there are people less fortunate than we are and not even majority of them live in N.Korea) based on the fact that it was not possible to vote for anything else than your representatives (who then could do what they wanted for few years). Now we have the technology to democratize our societies again - maybe we should use the chance.
If not we who would do it for us???
I think problem here is the same as in any other area of software engineering. One need software so one saves on engineering skipping it altogether. The result is a mess. The mess can be quite some nice environment for some. Any change to this world however (un)reasonable be fought with whatever means available.
I wonder - have I succeeded in getting modded to hell now or not?
what about half of the life savings. Or third of it? Would it do? This still can push you over the border to poverty even if not immediately. Unless of course you will decide to take justice into your own hands and spend the remaining parts of your life in federal prison for murder then you will not live in poverty. Choice is yours.
OC they will scan them first so they will prevent such evil act. In case that fails plain ol' beating the crap out of them will do.
No amount of new shiny compilers, languages etc will help if you start project not knowing engineering basics.
part of those basics is review process:
1.design
2.review what you have done
3.if needed do rework and goto 2.
else continue
4.write a report of finished work
That it is needed avoids many. Some even are delusional enough to believe that for instance outsourcing removes need for proper design whith result that they either lose customers, lose control or both.
There are (almost) no technical problems - quality is decided where budget and methodolgy is. Once these are screwed the product is doomed. From this perspective it is cheaper to skip/refrain from development instead of developing 'flowed by design products' that do not work anyway.
This is a sign of something more. The overall lack of basic logic capability (on /. as well as in real life) is just a fact. I see it every morning when I enter my office and open my mail box. It is fascinating to see educated people telling me for instance that you do not need any documentation and review process on (software) enginering projects. It is just a question of time to see them looking for reasons of failure. Surprisingly this reason is either aliens from outer space or the messangers.
Of course one shall never confuse simple incompetence and lack of knowledge with stupidity and bad will. The former can be eradicated the later not.
still bought their phone so your opinion does not matter.
Not for them and not for you.
Mao: according to wikipedia his policies (great leap forward & cultural revolution) caused massive deaths in tens of milions - say 25m that is 2.5% of 1 (for simplicity) bilion
Stalin: killed probably dozen milion or two - that would account to less than 5% (12m out of 290m).
Pol Pot killed (depending on estimation) up to 3m people from 15m that were there - that is 20%
On this scale they look like whimps now. Still they are brutal and do not tolerate different opinions.
I wonder however how many citizens of this great country actually care.
I do not think Chuck does any catapulting (except for his enemies). You just need to know how to read the statistics: he is not only the peak point. The mass of his achievements is so huge that it totals more than anything the rest of humanity could do thus making the average of it close to where he is. Thus all creation (whatever sex, strength and congregation) is just in state of deviation from this ideal that he Chuck Noriss is.
I hope you understand your mistake now.
Be fast and confess it aloud or Chuck will kick the . out of your /
I wonder why any new technology has to be such a hummer on existing ones and 'kill' them (more or less ) instantly? In my experience new technologies are the ones that die, not the established ones.
I still use newspapers and go to cinema occasionally. I do not buy new vinyl but that is because I think I have all I want already on CD and not much new stuff is comoing about worth my money. I still listen to radio and whatever the transport technology I will continue doing so. I do not watch that match of 'traditional' TV but that is because it is crap. Why would I want more crap or for that matter more crap over IP??? Why would it matter? That I can chose what I see??? But I can do it now and I still think majority of broadcast information is crap. The crap saturation levels will increase with more channels of distribution.
What I wanted to say is the following: new technologies come and some of them change the way we do things but majority are incorporated in the way invisible (of seemingly obvious) for a common user so they change something in the way the service is delivered but not the way it is consumed.
BTW: you say that it is almost impossible to use the service as the way 'we want' and yet you say that this is going to kill traditional TV??? Not very logical, is it?
what is a 'computer' like move?
There will be time computers will be playing chess well indeed. TFA article says that they do not know when to end the game and we know they were tweaked and adjusted to play against their specific oponents. In Baduk (another game of stategy) it is even more pronounced - the programs cannot even calculate the score properly - they need assistance of a human to determine status of groups after the game ends. This brings me to a conclusion that the software playing strategy games is stil in its infacy.
OC the machines will win against humans one day. So what? Will this mean end of humanity? It could be that we end it ourselves anyway - when some lunies will get hold of home made nukes for instance or 'properly' designed bilogical agents. The whole development forces us to (re)think our perception of reality. Only few however actually do it. The rest just carry on whatever they do.
new methods are being developed for Baduk too - just recently some french scientists used montecarlo method as a basis of their engine - surprisingly the thing went on to beat even strong players on 9x9 board. I do not think it did the same on 'normal' board though.
And this has nothing to do with transition from being-young-having-time-listinging-with-interest through being-grownup-having-the-money-but-no-time-to-list en-with-interest to being-middle-aged-having-no-interest-and-hifi-equi pment-connected-to-your-tv-box-so-that-you-can-hea r-the-blusts-in-the-newest-blockbuster ???
If you have interest in what you hear you will invest money in the equipment and tracks. If you need just musical bacground (frankly majority of what is produced at any time in history is just that) then you do need neither high quality of sound nor high quality of music as you are not really listening.
As TFA says - the fast food won. It is everywhere because people do not care what they eat. The same happened with music - it got to the masses so must fit with their muscial tastes (sad as they are) as well.
It is sad not because there is no good music around. It is sad because there is not so much interest in it. But was there that much of serious interest in it before? Now we just have an option to take it with us everywhere and that is the difference.
what is this silly thing about pregnancy? I thought majority of /.ers live in countries where contraceptives are easily available. Or were all the /.ers busy studing ways of using their PCs to run pr0n instead of leaning how to prevent such mistakes like unwanted pregnancy and/or STD???
strangly in cases like this a lie is not really that good for you anyway even if you do not get caught. If Clinton admited that he did what he did I guess the envy would be at least as big as the noise from so called moral guardians and such.
They lied and should be held responsible.
There is a debate of sorts (i.e. politicians do the talking) currently about german secret police and their right to spy on you in any way it sees fit - by breaking into you private computers too. Could this be a coincidence? Maybe the guy refused to talk to them and they let him know he is next to be thoroughly investigated for possible law violations. Incidentaly abbreviation of state's name can be transalted as Banana Republik Deutschland. It fits quite well actually.
Of course what TFA should be saying is that it is possible to reproduce achievements of a human offspring in language aquisition now and that is really something (if true).
I am sure after a (possibly longer) while such software will be able to produce speech in quality enjoyed by renown speakers like for instance our beloved Bubba the jerk eee och sorry I did not mean to offend you Mr President - please do not send me to Cuba,plsplspls!!! Then we will be in exactly the same shit as now only the presidents will made of silicon. Difference hardly noticable.
here my .02$
1. Voting with the wallet works if you have the choice.
2. Germany (and generally EU) is as much ruled by oligopolies as US is.
3. leaving the country is more or less difficult - it is depending on the circumstances (what you leave behind and where you going to) more or less difficult. If I go to Holland from where I am at the moment it will be a move of ~10km and I still can send my children to german school (if I was mad enough to want such a treatment for my own flesh and blood) and buy German beer, read German newspapers (my wife is German so that is important). I would not move only because of broadband access of course - but once you start thinking about it, then such thing will be one of (very) many factors you consider.
In the markets where the entry is very expensive (broadband infrastructure for instance and/or standards etc) the only hope for a customers are authorities - that sucks. It is interesting to see that monopolies have advantages too: GSM grew in popularity not least thanks to the fact that monopolies existed and enforced one prevailing standard of communication and could sell it to big and controlled markets .
That is what me think