"We're a country that's lagging behind on STEM (science, technical, engineering & math) education and experiencing somewhat of a shortage of people from the technical fields to fill jobs in our country because our educational system is a joke."
This is false, at least in the economically useful sense. High school education is rather woeful but that doesn't matter, because technical success
Most people who get technical undergraduate degrees are not working in the field. This is not because of a lack of education. This is because of a lack of jobs.
Only a very small fraction---the top 1% in practice---will potentially contribute to actual advancement of science and technology and be fully employed. For this level, the US educational system (i.e. graduate school) turns out more than are necessary and at the highest level of quality (so much that foreigners appreciate the degree at a high cost). Even still, the wages (outside Asia) for these graduates are not going up sharply. The market really does work. This is prima facie evidence there is no "shortage" nor has there ever been one. My company when it hires scientists can virtually "snap its fingers" and we can get at least 30 well qualified people at the MS and PhD level (all from top universities) just from our local city.
I remember the yammering from the National Science Foudnation back in 1987 or so.
I hear there's a new drilling technology that can bust through the craziest rocks like phasers: the drills are tipped with pieces of Objectivist cranium
"Want cheap energy alternatives to burning fossil fuels? Figure out how to make the government STOP handouts such as this, STOP putting regulatory barriers in the way of deployment, and make this hands-off behavior BELIEVABLE and DEPENDABLE for the decade or so it will take to devvelop, deploy, and profit from an oil replacement."
That's why all the vehicles in Africa run on magic fairy dust from cold fusion reactors.
"My point is that, as long as the government does the investing - in the form of picking their cronies as the winners, we WON'T get private investment."
Because, uh...um...they'll get cooties?
"Meanwhile government cronies on the dole put on a big show of doing the development but always manage to avoid bringing anything to market - unless it's to kill some competition for a while"
Gee. If these supposed government-funded morons don't ever bring anything to market---then how do they kill competition? And if they actually bring something to market, then.... isn't that at least OK?
If these supposed uber-brilliant capitalists know all the government-funded stuff is bunk---why does it matter? How does it possibly get in the way of the super profitable solution? Why are they so (supposedly) afraid of this miniscule government R&D?
And why shouldn't this super brilliant capitalist milk the government and *then* bring this magic technology to market and make a few billion?
Back in the real world of R&D, there is about 20-25 years of very hard work between the discovery of the basic phenomenon or engineering principle and commercial application. Capitalist investors are quite effective at funding the last two years of this. They go almost nothing beyond this.
And what if, perhaps, the energy research resulted in public open research papers and expertise which could be employed by ANY free market funded investor? Not just the 'crony'.
And with this kind of stuff, I'd prefer that a "crony" if necessary tries to bring it to market rather than nobody.
"For example: why is Texas, with the highest proportion of uninsured in the country, so anti-universal coverage? What is the thought process? Have people been convinced that A leads to Z?"
Because insurance is expensive and Texans (through the legislature) don't believe in doing anything for them, because they're more selfish than others.
Some of their churches may buy them an Easter meal, but that's about 200x cheaper than health insurance.
[quote]So please explain how Apple treats its customers badly but yet and still Apple has become the world's largest cell phone manufacturer (by revenue and profit) in less than four years?[/quote]
By making excellent-looking and excellent-working products which overcome 'customer service' objections.
That would work. If the company could also convince the court that all of these in-house advisers and lawyers really were working from $0. And any judge with some knowledge of the real world (and isn't corrupt) would know that is an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence.
"Yes sir, I am so pro-smoking that I will devote my time just to fight those evil do-gooders, just like me great great great granpappy on his plantation!"
"Manufacturing is dirty and nasty and you don't ever want to do it. It's for the dummies. It's buggywhips.
That's what's pounded into the heads of everyone going through school that scores above 100 on IQ. "
Not exactly.
It's more like, You Will Never Get a Job in Manufacturing Unless You Are Chinese So Just Freaking Get Over It.
And the executives running the enterprises---and their financiers---demand that they make it so.
Real world example. An MIT professor invented a pretty cool new technology for better lithium-ion batteries. He wanted to set up a company and manufacture them in the USA and started doing so. When he needed more money he went to the VC's---they demanded that he close down the US factory and re-open it in China before he gets any money. He did.
BTW, the professor was ethnically Chinese from Taiwan.
They saw a thriving business that they couldn't get their claws into, so they shut it down.
The poker industry has been lobbying the US federal government and state governments for a decade for explicit legalization and regulation on the basis that poker is a competitive game of skill, and not gambling. There is a grey area there.
Unfortunately, the federal government just responds by coercing the banks to stop processing transactions for poker sites, forcing them underground, and passing little laws here and there that makes it harder for the poker sites to do business. Meanwhile, poker has the status of a spectator sport on ESPN and a half dozen other cable channels.
The poker industry has been trying to play ball but Congress has just kicked them in the teeth. Online Poker wants to be taxed and regulated and legal in the U.S. They have gone to great lengths to cooperate with state governments the world over in criminal investigations, as well as legislation.
The poker industry which happens to compete with large entrenched interests and campaign donors has been trying to play ball but Congress has just kicked them in the teeth.
Fixed that for you.
There will be an online poker industry in the U.S. fairly soon of course. The point is to destroy the existing successful companies first, so that other favored ones can take their place, or buy them at a forcibly distressed price.
How many paid full time developers & testers (working at standard salaries for skilled professionals, which is on the order of ~80,000-130,000 USD salary p.a.) working on Libre/Open Office?
a) before Oracle fires all of theirs b) after Oracle fires of all of theirs
This isn't a rhetorical question. But I'd bet that the ratio of (b) / (a) is under 0.3.
Why would they need "the community" when most of the actual paid developers are still at Oracle. The people who left were mostly auxiliary people who were easily replaceable.
"Why would they need "the community" when most of the actual paid developers are still at Oracle. The people who left were mostly auxiliary people who were easily replaceable."
Because they're about to fire all the actual paid developers at Oracle. The only thing that Larry hates more than not having totalitarian asshole control is paying money and not having totalitarian asshole control.
And, realistically, Libre/OpenOffice will then suck. It's too big and complicated for people who don't have full time jobs working on it to work on it.
Sure you do. They just live somewhere else, and they're getting rich very quickly---great customers! Since they're a growth market, the companies have to hire more there to get local talent and undrerstanding, and of course rightsize the US cost structure.
I mean, who cares about the Equatorial Guinea market?
"materials science, lasers, telecommunications, computers, opto-electronics, radio communication, etc, would have gotten without quantum physics,... "
materials science - significantly not far as the chemistry would be less advanced lasers - nowhere. Lasers are intrinsically quantum mechanical. computers - Perfectly fine. opto-electronics - poorly, LEDs and semiconductor lasers can't be understood without quantum mechanics and the most interesting nonlinear materials may require QM. radio communication - Perfectly fine.
Slashdot Mirror
"We're a country that's lagging behind on STEM (science, technical, engineering & math) education and experiencing somewhat of a shortage of people from the technical fields to fill jobs in our country because our educational system is a joke."
This is false, at least in the economically useful sense. High school education is rather woeful but that doesn't matter, because technical success
Most people who get technical undergraduate degrees are not working in the field. This is not because of a lack of education. This is because of a lack of jobs.
Only a very small fraction---the top 1% in practice---will potentially contribute to actual advancement of science and technology and be fully employed. For this level, the US educational system (i.e. graduate school) turns out more than are necessary and at the highest level of quality (so much that foreigners appreciate the degree at a high cost). Even still, the wages (outside Asia) for these graduates are not going up sharply. The market really does work. This is prima facie evidence there is no "shortage" nor has there ever been one. My company when it hires scientists can virtually "snap its fingers" and we can get at least 30 well qualified people at the MS and PhD level (all from top universities) just from our local city.
I remember the yammering from the National Science Foudnation back in 1987 or so.
Fossil fuels are almost all made out of dinosaur food: plants & algae.
I hear there's a new drilling technology that can bust through the craziest rocks like phasers: the drills are tipped with pieces of Objectivist cranium
"Want cheap energy alternatives to burning fossil fuels? Figure out how to make the government STOP handouts such as this, STOP putting regulatory barriers in the way of deployment, and make this hands-off behavior BELIEVABLE and DEPENDABLE for the decade or so it will take to devvelop, deploy, and profit from an oil replacement."
That's why all the vehicles in Africa run on magic fairy dust from cold fusion reactors.
"My point is that, as long as the government does the investing - in the form of picking their cronies as the winners, we WON'T get private investment."
Because, uh...um...they'll get cooties?
"Meanwhile government cronies on the dole put on a big show of doing the development but always manage to avoid bringing anything to market - unless it's to kill some competition for a while"
Gee. If these supposed government-funded morons don't ever bring anything to market---then how do they kill competition? And if they actually bring something to market, then .... isn't that at least OK?
If these supposed uber-brilliant capitalists know all the government-funded stuff is bunk---why does it matter? How does it possibly get in the way of the super profitable solution? Why are they so (supposedly) afraid of this miniscule government R&D?
And why shouldn't this super brilliant capitalist milk the government and *then* bring this magic technology to market and make a few billion?
Back in the real world of R&D, there is about 20-25 years of very hard work between the discovery of the basic phenomenon or engineering principle and commercial application. Capitalist investors are quite effective at funding the last two years of this. They go almost nothing beyond this.
And what if, perhaps, the energy research resulted in public open research papers and expertise which could be employed by ANY free market funded investor? Not just the 'crony'.
And with this kind of stuff, I'd prefer that a "crony" if necessary tries to bring it to market rather than nobody.
That's because they're not buying (internal) hardware, they're buying "works".
Funny that I did it too---now that I'm earning a substantial salary I don't use Linux at home as I had been for the previous 10 years.
"For example: why is Texas, with the highest proportion of uninsured in the country, so anti-universal coverage? What is the thought process? Have people been convinced that A leads to Z?"
Because insurance is expensive and Texans (through the legislature) don't believe in doing anything for them, because they're more selfish than others.
Some of their churches may buy them an Easter meal, but that's about 200x cheaper than health insurance.
[quote]So please explain how Apple treats its customers badly but yet and still Apple has become the world's largest cell phone manufacturer (by revenue and profit) in less than four years?[/quote]
By making excellent-looking and excellent-working products which overcome 'customer service' objections.
The right way then is to have a normal length amber, and all-around red for a second or two.
Something I've learned in investing: overdogs win.
Why not buy oil, short treasuries and dollar?
1. Create iPhone
2. Wail on carriers so they don't ruin it
3. Profit!
4. Profit!!
5. Profit!!!
6. Profit!!!!
7. Profit!!!!!
Why not run nuclear reactors in a nitrogen heavy/oxygen-light atmosphere all the time?
Explosions + nuclear cores do not mix well. Surely some genius might have recognized this.
That would work. If the company could also convince the court that all of these in-house advisers and lawyers really were working from $0. And any judge with some knowledge of the real world (and isn't corrupt) would know that is an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence.
"Yes sir, I am so pro-smoking that I will devote my time just to fight those evil do-gooders, just like me great great great granpappy on his plantation!"
Asshole Aspie!
(no mister bot writer, that is is not Ad Hominem, it's an insult)
I think that banking is actually a little more honorable than click ads.
"Manufacturing is dirty and nasty and you don't ever want to do it. It's for the dummies. It's buggywhips.
That's what's pounded into the heads of everyone going through school that scores above 100 on IQ. "
Not exactly.
It's more like, You Will Never Get a Job in Manufacturing Unless You Are Chinese So Just Freaking Get Over It.
And the executives running the enterprises---and their financiers---demand that they make it so.
Real world example. An MIT professor invented a pretty cool new technology for better lithium-ion batteries. He wanted to set up a company and manufacture them in the USA and started doing so. When he needed more money he went to the VC's---they demanded that he close down the US factory and re-open it in China before he gets any money. He did.
BTW, the professor was ethnically Chinese from Taiwan.
The poker industry has been lobbying the US federal government and state governments for a decade for explicit legalization and regulation on the basis that poker is a competitive game of skill, and not gambling. There is a grey area there.
Unfortunately, the federal government just responds by coercing the banks to stop processing transactions for poker sites, forcing them underground, and passing little laws here and there that makes it harder for the poker sites to do business. Meanwhile, poker has the status of a spectator sport on ESPN and a half dozen other cable channels.
The poker industry has been trying to play ball but Congress has just kicked them in the teeth. Online Poker wants to be taxed and regulated and legal in the U.S. They have gone to great lengths to cooperate with state governments the world over in criminal investigations, as well as legislation.
The poker industry which happens to compete with large entrenched interests and campaign donors has been trying to play ball but Congress has just kicked them in the teeth.
Fixed that for you.
There will be an online poker industry in the U.S. fairly soon of course. The point is to destroy the existing successful companies first, so that other favored ones can take their place, or buy them at a forcibly distressed price.
Sure. There's support and there's support.
How many paid full time developers & testers (working at standard salaries for skilled professionals, which is on the order of ~80,000-130,000 USD salary p.a.) working on Libre/Open Office?
a) before Oracle fires all of theirs
b) after Oracle fires of all of theirs
This isn't a rhetorical question. But I'd bet that the ratio of (b) / (a) is under 0.3.
Why would they need "the community" when most of the actual paid developers are still at Oracle. The people who left were mostly auxiliary people who were easily replaceable.
"Why would they need "the community" when most of the actual paid developers are still at Oracle. The people who left were mostly auxiliary people who were easily replaceable."
Because they're about to fire all the actual paid developers at Oracle. The only thing that Larry hates more than not having totalitarian asshole control is paying money and not having totalitarian asshole control.
And, realistically, Libre/OpenOffice will then suck. It's too big and complicated for people who don't have full time jobs working on it to work on it.
More "mass brain guillotineage"
And all the artists under contract sue Google.
Sure you do. They just live somewhere else, and they're getting rich very quickly---great customers! Since they're a growth market, the companies have to hire more there to get local talent and undrerstanding, and of course rightsize the US cost structure.
I mean, who cares about the Equatorial Guinea market?
Mark Zuckerberg could have fired him, but he didn't just fire him. He stole everything from him.
"materials science, lasers, telecommunications, computers, opto-electronics, radio communication, etc, would have gotten without quantum physics, ... "
materials science - significantly not far as the chemistry would be less advanced
lasers - nowhere. Lasers are intrinsically quantum mechanical.
computers - Perfectly fine.
opto-electronics - poorly, LEDs and semiconductor lasers can't be understood without quantum mechanics and the most interesting nonlinear materials may require QM.
radio communication - Perfectly fine.