just like what we did to everything we invented before during ancient history, and made a part of our lives today. like judiciary, municipial services, hell, even scientific method.
none of them were perfect and in the shape they were in when they were invented, not even hundreds of years after their invention.
open source software is just 15-20 years old. give us a break.
try to suggest ways to improve it, instead of scuttling it. what would happen if they scuttled scientific method when it erred a few times ?
That statement is filled with logical fallacies.. First of all, I assume you're including those scientific pioneers who lived back when scientific education was rare or non-existent.
no. i specifically focused on post 1800 era. if i had gone that way back, it would be much more moot to prove the irrelevance between muse, innovation, creativity and scholastic education. or, maybe the inverse correlation.
Second, to assume we'd be 30% behind without them would be to assume that nobody else would come up with the idea. Would we lose out on calculus because Newton wasn't around? Nope, because we'd still have Leibniz.
thats a long discussion, probably with the possible outcome of 'possibly yes, but maybe no'. or, with much more probability, 'yes, but much much later than due time'.
That being said, it is true that a rigorous scientific education system can reduce the creative output of an individual.. But individuals can gain an education outside of the scholastic hierarchy. I mean, with the right books and some innate aptitude you could become the greatest mathematician the world has ever known.
it is ironic - we are giving an education to exactly bolster innovation and discovery, but it does totally to the opposite and people have to resort to outside means (the mind of masses again) to invent, just like it was back in history.
that tells me academia is obsolete.
But for some things, like building robots, you'd need an advanced lab too, which is hard to get outside of academia or a corporate environment. But please, don't discount the value of learning, whether it be on your own or through a university.
You are spouting off with no knowledge of what you speak of. You're an idiot.
i cant teach you hundreds of years of history just like that here, lad. spend your own effort. and dont talk with certainty on subjects you dont know about.
Although Faraday received little formal education and knew little of higher mathematics, such as calculus, he was one of the most influential scientists in history. Some historians[4] of science refer to him as the best experimentalist in the history of science.[5] The SI unit of capacitance, the farad, is named after him, as is the Faraday constant, the charge on a mole of electrons (about 96,485 coulombs). Faraday's law of induction states that a magnetic field changing in time creates a proportional electromotive force.
who's the idiot now ?
I'm in my 30s and have been working for some years now. Your talk reeks of idiocy and too much caffeine, I suggest you calm down and actually look at what you are talking about. This guy builds mechanical automata driven by electric motors. Is it fun? Yes. Is it in any way groundbreaking? No.
faraday says you dont know shit, despite your 30 years age and 'calmness'.
there are little number of fields in which knack and experience has more weight, than I.T. has.
if you are good at what you do, it is quite easy to get a decent job. and even foreign job, irrelevant of where you live.
there are a lot of dinosaur companies, in which the hirings are decided by human resources. human resources is a relatively new field that lacks defined methods and foolproof approaches. hence one of the pitfalls they fall into is shoving a college degree requirement into I.T. jobs, just like they do to anything else. not only that, but some requires 'respectable' colleges, or degrees, which further diminishes their chances of hiring competent i.t. staff.
i.t. is a free field, in which all tools to learn and conduct your trade is contained IN the big cloud, internet, itself. one can start with nothing and become a competent sysadmin or developer within 2 years, doing nothing but learning from the internet through guides and tutorials and constantly developing.
not only that, but it also provides you all the tools to set up your own business ranging from marketing tools to word of mouth.
however if you mean, you want to land a job in some old school (non startup), monolithic, big megacorporation or corporation, you will need extra reputation on top of your abilities. but even then you may not be able to get past the stupidity that is human resources in some corporations.
but then again it is rather foolish to be wanting to work in such a corporation which lets human resources axe its chances of hiring capable individuals - if corporation's philosophy is skewed there, it is highly possible that it is also skewed in other stuff too, which may include work ethics, employee relations, or company psychology and atmosphere.
are you aware that, EVEN if it was like that, it would constitute a whopping 30% ratio among science pioneers ?
imagine your scientific innovation and output, and therefore modern day technology being 30% behind.
even this is a long shot, it would be even more, because there is synergy effect, and also there is the fact that some inventions have far reaching impact than others.
moreover, that 30% ratio, if it was like you said, would itself prove that scientific training has almost no effect on anything, as 30% of science pioneers being as such without NO scientific or regular training. 5% and you could call exception. 10%, you would call irregularity. but 30%, would nail that scientific education is irrelevant to invention and innovation.
No, they didn't build electric automata out of scrap on a farm, they dabbled in mathematical and theoretical understanding of physical phenomena and made practical use of it. Whole different kettle of fish.
you dont know shit about science history. most of the inventors and pioneers didnt have any mathematical or theoretical tools or methods to ever use or to understand or even imagine physical phenomenon. not only that, some of them didnt have even any kind of school education.
from the way you talk its clear that you are probably a youngster who is fresh into college. your talk reeks of stupid scientific/scholastic elitism. dont worry, you will get over it by the time you get to 30s.
replying to a person specifically, and then talking as if s/he was third person like 'And of this creep in question. ..' is indicative of a lot of personality disorders than your entire post reeks out.
or, do you speak of yourself in third person too, like 'Fantastic Lad hungry' or 'Fantastic Lad pee pee' ?
check yourself. you got fixated on some long gone discussion, and typing up entire essays fixated on the same point. you have problems.
not the cognitive perception ability problem, that causes you not to be able to understand the futility of living if you had lived in 12th century and were a feudal lord's serf, but real personality disorders.
scientific method makes even the most eager mind more and more conformist, because it itself is an algorithm that can be almost automated, with little creative input. propose, test, theorize propose test theorize.
great discoveries however are done in times of great muse. a farmer in a barn can access muse more easily than a mind cooked in a methodist, scholastic university.
No, something IS going on but you have no idea
on
Farmer Builds Robot Army
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
its called creativity, muse, curiousity. these 3 have been and are the driving force behind all technical achievements and innovations and inventions since the dawn of time.
but clearly, you dont have either, and dont understand shit about them when you see them.
What I wasn't impressed by was the lack of insight of the post I replied to. He's not some sort of robotics Professor, he's a guy that's built some ace robots out of scrap.
I love these sorts of crackpots, but let's not pretend he's done any cutting edge engineering here, 'kay?
dear moron,
if you had ANY knowledge of history of science, you would have known that with a few exceptions, ALL of the biggest scientists and inventors of the past are the sort of person THAT guy is.
you just called a lot of people ranging from faraday to tesla crackpots.
are you sure slashdot is the right place for you ?
Slashdot Mirror
take a chill pill. it works.
just like what we did to everything we invented before during ancient history, and made a part of our lives today. like judiciary, municipial services, hell, even scientific method.
none of them were perfect and in the shape they were in when they were invented, not even hundreds of years after their invention.
open source software is just 15-20 years old. give us a break.
try to suggest ways to improve it, instead of scuttling it. what would happen if they scuttled scientific method when it erred a few times ?
there is also something called projection you know. research it a bit.
i wont allow it. and thats final.
That statement is filled with logical fallacies.. First of all, I assume you're including those scientific pioneers who lived back when scientific education was rare or non-existent.
no. i specifically focused on post 1800 era. if i had gone that way back, it would be much more moot to prove the irrelevance between muse, innovation, creativity and scholastic education. or, maybe the inverse correlation.
Second, to assume we'd be 30% behind without them would be to assume that nobody else would come up with the idea. Would we lose out on calculus because Newton wasn't around? Nope, because we'd still have Leibniz.
thats a long discussion, probably with the possible outcome of 'possibly yes, but maybe no'. or, with much more probability, 'yes, but much much later than due time'.
That being said, it is true that a rigorous scientific education system can reduce the creative output of an individual.. But individuals can gain an education outside of the scholastic hierarchy. I mean, with the right books and some innate aptitude you could become the greatest mathematician the world has ever known.
it is ironic - we are giving an education to exactly bolster innovation and discovery, but it does totally to the opposite and people have to resort to outside means (the mind of masses again) to invent, just like it was back in history.
that tells me academia is obsolete.
But for some things, like building robots, you'd need an advanced lab too, which is hard to get outside of academia or a corporate environment. But please, don't discount the value of learning, whether it be on your own or through a university.
learning != scholastic education/academia
prove it. It's a bunch of fucking nonsense.
You are spouting off with no knowledge of what you speak of. You're an idiot.
i cant teach you hundreds of years of history just like that here, lad. spend your own effort. and dont talk with certainty on subjects you dont know about.
:
here, start with this clue and build up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Faraday
Although Faraday received little formal education and knew little of higher mathematics, such as calculus, he was one of the most influential scientists in history. Some historians[4] of science refer to him as the best experimentalist in the history of science.[5] The SI unit of capacitance, the farad, is named after him, as is the Faraday constant, the charge on a mole of electrons (about 96,485 coulombs). Faraday's law of induction states that a magnetic field changing in time creates a proportional electromotive force.
who's the idiot now ?
I'm in my 30s and have been working for some years now. Your talk reeks of idiocy and too much caffeine, I suggest you calm down and actually look at what you are talking about. This guy builds mechanical automata driven by electric motors. Is it fun? Yes. Is it in any way groundbreaking? No.
faraday says you dont know shit, despite your 30 years age and 'calmness'.
there are little number of fields in which knack and experience has more weight, than I.T. has.
if you are good at what you do, it is quite easy to get a decent job. and even foreign job, irrelevant of where you live.
there are a lot of dinosaur companies, in which the hirings are decided by human resources. human resources is a relatively new field that lacks defined methods and foolproof approaches. hence one of the pitfalls they fall into is shoving a college degree requirement into I.T. jobs, just like they do to anything else. not only that, but some requires 'respectable' colleges, or degrees, which further diminishes their chances of hiring competent i.t. staff.
i.t. is a free field, in which all tools to learn and conduct your trade is contained IN the big cloud, internet, itself. one can start with nothing and become a competent sysadmin or developer within 2 years, doing nothing but learning from the internet through guides and tutorials and constantly developing.
not only that, but it also provides you all the tools to set up your own business ranging from marketing tools to word of mouth.
however if you mean, you want to land a job in some old school (non startup), monolithic, big megacorporation or corporation, you will need extra reputation on top of your abilities. but even then you may not be able to get past the stupidity that is human resources in some corporations.
but then again it is rather foolish to be wanting to work in such a corporation which lets human resources axe its chances of hiring capable individuals - if corporation's philosophy is skewed there, it is highly possible that it is also skewed in other stuff too, which may include work ethics, employee relations, or company psychology and atmosphere.
where corporations can buy laws and court decisions and even opinion through use of money.
same doesnt fly in europe. french try it sometimes, but Eu bitch slaps them on the face and they sit pretty.
you people gotta wake up, and take over your country.
and they love me. that's what blonde means to me.
are you aware that, EVEN if it was like that, it would constitute a whopping 30% ratio among science pioneers ?
imagine your scientific innovation and output, and therefore modern day technology being 30% behind.
even this is a long shot, it would be even more, because there is synergy effect, and also there is the fact that some inventions have far reaching impact than others.
moreover, that 30% ratio, if it was like you said, would itself prove that scientific training has almost no effect on anything, as 30% of science pioneers being as such without NO scientific or regular training. 5% and you could call exception. 10%, you would call irregularity. but 30%, would nail that scientific education is irrelevant to invention and innovation.
No, they didn't build electric automata out of scrap on a farm, they dabbled in mathematical and theoretical understanding of physical phenomena and made practical use of it. Whole different kettle of fish.
you dont know shit about science history. most of the inventors and pioneers didnt have any mathematical or theoretical tools or methods to ever use or to understand or even imagine physical phenomenon. not only that, some of them didnt have even any kind of school education.
from the way you talk its clear that you are probably a youngster who is fresh into college. your talk reeks of stupid scientific/scholastic elitism. dont worry, you will get over it by the time you get to 30s.
DO NOT connect military affiliated computers to internet, EVER.
dont you already have your on military-net ? run them only on that network.
his machines climb walls, not follow lines on paper.
'unity' is not a stupid concept. in unity there is coherence and harmony. and action triggers reaction.
we have NO idea what kind of role do these squits play in ecosystem of the world.
i said world. if you noticed, these squids are in every ocean of the world. apparently they are a common species.
that makes their situation more integral to world ecosystem.
doesnt it give you johnsons ?
dont discriminate against johnsons.
replying to a person specifically, and then talking as if s/he was third person like 'And of this creep in question. . .' is indicative of a lot of personality disorders than your entire post reeks out.
or, do you speak of yourself in third person too, like 'Fantastic Lad hungry' or 'Fantastic Lad pee pee' ?
check yourself. you got fixated on some long gone discussion, and typing up entire essays fixated on the same point. you have problems.
not the cognitive perception ability problem, that causes you not to be able to understand the futility of living if you had lived in 12th century and were a feudal lord's serf, but real personality disorders.
get a doc.
'serious background' also hampers.
scientific method makes even the most eager mind more and more conformist, because it itself is an algorithm that can be almost automated, with little creative input. propose, test, theorize propose test theorize.
great discoveries however are done in times of great muse. a farmer in a barn can access muse more easily than a mind cooked in a methodist, scholastic university.
how many 'shitty' simple robots you have made in your entire life, yourself ?
please enlighten us.
babbage ?
its called creativity, muse, curiousity. these 3 have been and are the driving force behind all technical achievements and innovations and inventions since the dawn of time.
but clearly, you dont have either, and dont understand shit about them when you see them.
Parent is right. this story is WAY more geek/nerd than a goodly percentage of stories we had in the last few weeks.
move this to main from idle.
What I wasn't impressed by was the lack of insight of the post I replied to. He's not some sort of robotics Professor, he's a guy that's built some ace robots out of scrap.
I love these sorts of crackpots, but let's not pretend he's done any cutting edge engineering here, 'kay?
dear moron,
if you had ANY knowledge of history of science, you would have known that with a few exceptions, ALL of the biggest scientists and inventors of the past are the sort of person THAT guy is.
you just called a lot of people ranging from faraday to tesla crackpots.
are you sure slashdot is the right place for you ?
modern scholastic education is more bent on making the student a clerk than provoking creativity.
throughout history, youll find that a pathetically small percentage of great inventors have been through scholastic education.
this person should be given a lab, and a few good technical assistants. just like 19th century inventors had.
i was all ready for the interdimensional warp that would teleport the world !!