It isn't clear that astrological beliefs are in the same category as religious faith. Astrological belief is probably a form of entertainment for most people, like fortune cookies, psychics, etc. If it is true, nonetheless, that astrology could be a point of contention between believers and nonbelievers, I wonder if other forms of entertainment could be contentious as well. I'm thinking of the lottery in particular. Should scientists date people who play the lotto?
The quote parent and I are referring to is this -- "The bill would require cable, Internet and satellite providers to use reasonably available technology to protect the music, IF they want to enjoy the benefit of a government license. If, however, a company wants to use new technologies beyond the scope of a government license then they must go to the record companies directly to negotiate a licensing agreement through the market."
Yes as you point out the language elsewhere is somewhat broader and seems to cover all Internet and satellite broadcasts. However, the above paragraph clearly states what kind of broadcasts are covered by the proposed requirements. Under the proposed rule, not everyone who broadcasts needs a government license, but everyone who gets a government license has to apply DRM. Don't like DRM? Negotiate licensing with the copyright holder for every song you play.
If you read what Feinstein herself says about the bill, it's clearly about commercial broadcasts-- the kind you need a government license for. If you broadcast other people's music under a government broadcast license, you have to apply DRM. If you make your own licensing arrangements with the copyright holders (i.e. yourself, perhaps), the bill doesn't apply.
...because sooner or later you'll have a job whether you like it or not.
I agree that your major doesn't matter that much. I finished a graduate degree in mathematics a year or so ago and I've already forgotten most of the proofs I had learned. If I had to pick it up again, I probably could, but I don't imagine needing to for work. As it turns out, there's not much call for the Fundamental Theorem of Finitely-Generated Modules over a Principal Ideal Domain out there in the work force.
Anyway, so I learned some programming and TCP/IP networking in my spare time over the past few years and I ended up getting an IT job through a family member. If I had majored in literature in school (which I almost did), I still probably could have gotten the job. So if you find yourself asking "What kind of jobs can I get with degree X?" you're obviously not the "I've always wanted to be a doctor" type. And that means you're asking the wrong question. Instead ask "Who do I know, and where do they work?" That's a better question because you're probably going to get your job through someone you know and you're going to take the best job offer you get, regardless of whether it's relevant to your major or not.
For now, enjoy the mathematics. It's beautiful stuff. If you're not satisfied after 4 years or want to know what a principal ideal domain is, get a master's. Beyond that, beware. Few people who start a Ph.D. ever finish. I think the figure is something like 1 in 3. And those 2 in 3 who don't finish are all smart, dedicated people just like you. If you have to ask whether you want a Ph.D., you probably ought to take some time off after you finish what you're working on now and see whether you can live without mathematics. If so, a Ph.D. ain't for you.
Slashdot Mirror
It isn't clear that astrological beliefs are in the same category as religious faith. Astrological belief is probably a form of entertainment for most people, like fortune cookies, psychics, etc. If it is true, nonetheless, that astrology could be a point of contention between believers and nonbelievers, I wonder if other forms of entertainment could be contentious as well. I'm thinking of the lottery in particular. Should scientists date people who play the lotto?
The quote parent and I are referring to is this -- "The bill would require cable, Internet and satellite providers to use reasonably available technology to protect the music, IF they want to enjoy the benefit of a government license. If, however, a company wants to use new technologies beyond the scope of a government license then they must go to the record companies directly to negotiate a licensing agreement through the market."
Yes as you point out the language elsewhere is somewhat broader and seems to cover all Internet and satellite broadcasts. However, the above paragraph clearly states what kind of broadcasts are covered by the proposed requirements. Under the proposed rule, not everyone who broadcasts needs a government license, but everyone who gets a government license has to apply DRM. Don't like DRM? Negotiate licensing with the copyright holder for every song you play.
Mod parent up.
If you read what Feinstein herself says about the bill, it's clearly about commercial broadcasts-- the kind you need a government license for. If you broadcast other people's music under a government broadcast license, you have to apply DRM. If you make your own licensing arrangements with the copyright holders (i.e. yourself, perhaps), the bill doesn't apply.
I agree that your major doesn't matter that much. I finished a graduate degree in mathematics a year or so ago and I've already forgotten most of the proofs I had learned. If I had to pick it up again, I probably could, but I don't imagine needing to for work. As it turns out, there's not much call for the Fundamental Theorem of Finitely-Generated Modules over a Principal Ideal Domain out there in the work force.
Anyway, so I learned some programming and TCP/IP networking in my spare time over the past few years and I ended up getting an IT job through a family member. If I had majored in literature in school (which I almost did), I still probably could have gotten the job. So if you find yourself asking "What kind of jobs can I get with degree X?" you're obviously not the "I've always wanted to be a doctor" type. And that means you're asking the wrong question. Instead ask "Who do I know, and where do they work?" That's a better question because you're probably going to get your job through someone you know and you're going to take the best job offer you get, regardless of whether it's relevant to your major or not.
For now, enjoy the mathematics. It's beautiful stuff. If you're not satisfied after 4 years or want to know what a principal ideal domain is, get a master's. Beyond that, beware. Few people who start a Ph.D. ever finish. I think the figure is something like 1 in 3. And those 2 in 3 who don't finish are all smart, dedicated people just like you. If you have to ask whether you want a Ph.D., you probably ought to take some time off after you finish what you're working on now and see whether you can live without mathematics. If so, a Ph.D. ain't for you.