I did the same thing with my psychology degree 30 years ago, but without the certs. These days I design and code automated testing systems and manage the virtual machine environments. Certs might have helped. Hard to say. Never had time.
And complete it, for someone. A church, or a nonprofit would be good. Another alternative would be to build a useful application and add it to SourceForge. Nothing spices up a resume like free downloadable open software that you've written, assuming it's well tested.
It's jazzed up with the ability to get statistical information using some peripheral semantic analysis, so it isn't quite as rigid as older systems, but it's no different in kind. It's impressive and useful, granted, but certainly no breakthrough, and very unlikely to replace anybody for quite a while.
This system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Brain_Project), in contrast will put lots of humans out of work. Oddly, once it's in place, it's unlikely to matter, since we get so many solutions within the domain of practically solvable problems. Unemployment and resource allocation, hopefully, will be solvable in a non-awful way.
True. The factor here is, "The easiest interface is the one you already know." That, and software compatibility, are the two chains that keep everyone tied to Microsoft. At the moment, they're even screwing that up.
A common misconception. What Steve Jobs did was realize that *humans* mattered, not the machine. Machines only exist to serve *humans,* right down to being pretty and easy to use. He had his priorities straight, unlike the designers at Microsoft.
In the 90s, when mass computing was new, software from Microsoft was designed by young, arrogant 20-somethings with no thought for usability or the needs of customers, usually business customers. It's 2012 now, not 1992. The world changed - Microsoft hasn't. Users got older and less tolerant of giggly nonsense and unstable systems. They don't want to learn new stuff. They want to get their tasks done. Period. Businesses need results, not the latest and coolest anything. Cobol still exists for a reason.
Apple got this, and succeeded, and even stayed culturally cool. Their software is about the task, not the software itself. Microsoft still hasn't got it. The culture of arrogant, don't-give-a-shit-about-you-if-you-can't-figure-it-out, cool, 20-something males is still very much in evidence in each release.
Grow up Microsoft. Nobody cares about you or your software. The moment there's a better, equally affordable alternative (which Linux could be if marketed correctly), there we all go. Make it easy, be polite and never, never patronize and you might have a chance at survival, but I'm not betting on it.
Mod up! This is absurdly true. Office got a new interface that it didn't need that seems no better (just different) from its last interface. Now the same thing is being done for windows. Why not just add a "Tablet/Phone Shell Mode" and be done with it? I'd me much more interested in a faster file system, fast, usable search (still waiting, Microsoft), fewer blue screens, Azure presented in such a way that anyone can host any windows application, legacy or not (Once again, they miss the obvious).
In the last 20 years, Microsoft has been busy solving problems nobody I know seems to have had. I guess they're just going to continue the tradition.
Otherwise it fails. Two of the most popular languages in existence are Visual Basic and PHP. Math folks and programmers tormented by the hobgoblin of consistency hate both languages. Guess what? It doesn't matter.
Sure, they're inconsistent, oddly constructed and don't support polymorphism (which describes many programmers too, for that matter). Nevertheless, you can get something *done* in jig time and move on with your life. They are languages that are not about the language but the task. In that sense, they perfectly suit the human mind and so they get used again and again.
The big fail of programming languages generally is that nobody thought to combine ease of use with scalability. A programming language should make the most frequently done things trivially easy (e.g. file i/o) and less frequently done things (e.g. serializing and deserializing) possible.
My favorite example of a programming language fail is Powershell. The language is very consistent. It's a consistent pain in the ass. It's picky, prissy and everything has to be done "just so." I use it every day, and I'd like to condemn the developers to a hell where they had to do real system administration with it for eternity.
Greed too. Hire a CEO or manager who is incompetent (e.g. Carly Fiona) or simply willing to gut a company for personal gain (e.g. Carly Fiona) and its eventual destruction is assured.
The:) after the sentence was supposed to alert you to the fact that the misspelling was an intentional joke. Sorry. I'll try and be less subtle next time.
...shows up in the heavily redacted original documents. It would be funny, if the writer wasn't so unintentionally creepy and didn't take himself so seriously. It has the hallmark of an individual totally incapable of self-reflection.
As in medical, engineering, software, geophysics, etc. The best thing that could happen to the USA is a population bias in favor of intelligence. At the moment, it would seem that we desperately need that.
However, I would also propose that those with without technical degrees (e.g political science, ethno-musicology) need not apply, but good luck in your country search.
Kids are smart enough to see the state of their elders, who are competing with low wage engineers in China and India. They also see financial professionals, many of whom are still making absurdly high salaries shuffling abstract concepts around to reach a high score in what has become the world's ultimate computer game, the financial equities industry. Even lawyers pull in up to $600/hr.
So what's a smart, self-interested kid to do? Sweat through math and science classes in the hopes of getting that engineering job where he/she competes with someone in Uzbekhistan for $5/hr, or focus on career paths that go towards law or finance?
This is the elephant in the room that politicians and pundits dance around whenever this debate resurfaces every few months. Until salaries match price structure in the USA, there's no motivation whatsoever for parents to push for better math and science education in the public schools, and even less for students to jump up and down and squeal "Whoo! Whoo! I want to be underpaid for my skills for the rest of my life!"
They have a choice. They can go where the money is, or not. Everything else is BS, pure and simple.
created by your local omniscient, omnipotent (from our point of view) superbeing. It can't be ruled out. At the same time, if it's true, it's simply not knowable. The aforementioned superbeing could add or delete information in our awarenesses at will.
So, if true, then it's not knowable. Actually, even if it's false, it's not knowable since you can't prove the negative.
It's dumber than that. Our window of identifiable radio wave communication is likely to be less than 2 centuries, after which it'll look like background noise (i.e. max entropy encryption/compression). We should be looking for possible artifacts, unusually large radio signatures, spores on Earth or in orbit that might be artificial, stellar objects that are accelerating or decelerating for no obvious reason, large objects radiating dimly in infrared like a dyson sphere, and so on.)
Another problem is recognizing intelligence. Here on Earth, if moss had developed advanced mathematical and philosophical intelligence, but only communicated chemically, used a binary code that was chemically, but not "neurologically" mediated, used no tools obvious to us, and mostly discussed problems in soil chemistry, how would we know? We could be looking at intelligence, but never see it.
Slashdot Mirror
My solution was to never let a network cable anywhere near the dedicated iLO port. I am not a trusting soul.
I did the same thing with my psychology degree 30 years ago, but without the certs. These days I design and code automated testing systems and manage the virtual machine environments. Certs might have helped. Hard to say. Never had time.
And complete it, for someone. A church, or a nonprofit would be good. Another alternative would be to build a useful application and add it to SourceForge. Nothing spices up a resume like free downloadable open software that you've written, assuming it's well tested.
It's jazzed up with the ability to get statistical information using some peripheral semantic analysis, so it isn't quite as rigid as older systems, but it's no different in kind. It's impressive and useful, granted, but certainly no breakthrough, and very unlikely to replace anybody for quite a while.
This system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Brain_Project), in contrast will put lots of humans out of work. Oddly, once it's in place, it's unlikely to matter, since we get so many solutions within the domain of practically solvable problems. Unemployment and resource allocation, hopefully, will be solvable in a non-awful way.
True. The factor here is, "The easiest interface is the one you already know." That, and software compatibility, are the two chains that keep everyone tied to Microsoft. At the moment, they're even screwing that up.
A common misconception. What Steve Jobs did was realize that *humans* mattered, not the machine. Machines only exist to serve *humans,* right down to being pretty and easy to use. He had his priorities straight, unlike the designers at Microsoft.
In the 90s, when mass computing was new, software from Microsoft was designed by young, arrogant 20-somethings with no thought for usability or the needs of customers, usually business customers. It's 2012 now, not 1992. The world changed - Microsoft hasn't. Users got older and less tolerant of giggly nonsense and unstable systems. They don't want to learn new stuff. They want to get their tasks done. Period. Businesses need results, not the latest and coolest anything. Cobol still exists for a reason.
Apple got this, and succeeded, and even stayed culturally cool. Their software is about the task, not the software itself. Microsoft still hasn't got it. The culture of arrogant, don't-give-a-shit-about-you-if-you-can't-figure-it-out, cool, 20-something males is still very much in evidence in each release.
Grow up Microsoft. Nobody cares about you or your software. The moment there's a better, equally affordable alternative (which Linux could be if marketed correctly), there we all go. Make it easy, be polite and never, never patronize and you might have a chance at survival, but I'm not betting on it.
Mod up! This is absurdly true. Office got a new interface that it didn't need that seems no better (just different) from its last interface. Now the same thing is being done for windows. Why not just add a "Tablet/Phone Shell Mode" and be done with it? I'd me much more interested in a faster file system, fast, usable search (still waiting, Microsoft), fewer blue screens, Azure presented in such a way that anyone can host any windows application, legacy or not (Once again, they miss the obvious).
In the last 20 years, Microsoft has been busy solving problems nobody I know seems to have had. I guess they're just going to continue the tradition.
Historically speaking, you really could have stopped right there.
True. I was referring to the old VB6. I don't know exactly how popular vb.net is.
Otherwise it fails. Two of the most popular languages in existence are Visual Basic and PHP. Math folks and programmers tormented by the hobgoblin of consistency hate both languages. Guess what? It doesn't matter.
Sure, they're inconsistent, oddly constructed and don't support polymorphism (which describes many programmers too, for that matter). Nevertheless, you can get something *done* in jig time and move on with your life. They are languages that are not about the language but the task. In that sense, they perfectly suit the human mind and so they get used again and again.
The big fail of programming languages generally is that nobody thought to combine ease of use with scalability. A programming language should make the most frequently done things trivially easy (e.g. file i/o) and less frequently done things (e.g. serializing and deserializing) possible.
My favorite example of a programming language fail is Powershell. The language is very consistent. It's a consistent pain in the ass. It's picky, prissy and everything has to be done "just so." I use it every day, and I'd like to condemn the developers to a hell where they had to do real system administration with it for eternity.
Greed too. Hire a CEO or manager who is incompetent (e.g. Carly Fiona) or simply willing to gut a company for personal gain (e.g. Carly Fiona) and its eventual destruction is assured.
A thousand pardons ;)
The :) after the sentence was supposed to alert you to the fact that the misspelling was an intentional joke. Sorry. I'll try and be less subtle next time.
...shows up in the heavily redacted original documents. It would be funny, if the writer wasn't so unintentionally creepy and didn't take himself so seriously. It has the hallmark of an individual totally incapable of self-reflection.
I imagine tea plants absorb quite a bit of fluorine too.
Unless they loose it somewhere. :)
Yes, I am a spelling Nazi. Get over it.
Or necessarily false either. Had she not been drinking coffee, the onset might have started a decade earlier.
As in medical, engineering, software, geophysics, etc. The best thing that could happen to the USA is a population bias in favor of intelligence. At the moment, it would seem that we desperately need that.
However, I would also propose that those with without technical degrees (e.g political science, ethno-musicology) need not apply, but good luck in your country search.
Kids are smart enough to see the state of their elders, who are competing with low wage engineers in China and India. They also see financial professionals, many of whom are still making absurdly high salaries shuffling abstract concepts around to reach a high score in what has become the world's ultimate computer game, the financial equities industry. Even lawyers pull in up to $600 /hr.
So what's a smart, self-interested kid to do? Sweat through math and science classes in the hopes of getting that engineering job where he/she competes with someone in Uzbekhistan for $5/hr, or focus on career paths that go towards law or finance?
This is the elephant in the room that politicians and pundits dance around whenever this debate resurfaces every few months. Until salaries match price structure in the USA, there's no motivation whatsoever for parents to push for better math and science education in the public schools, and even less for students to jump up and down and squeal "Whoo! Whoo! I want to be underpaid for my skills for the rest of my life!"
They have a choice. They can go where the money is, or not. Everything else is BS, pure and simple.
created by your local omniscient, omnipotent (from our point of view) superbeing. It can't be ruled out. At the same time, if it's true, it's simply not knowable. The aforementioned superbeing could add or delete information in our awarenesses at will.
So, if true, then it's not knowable. Actually, even if it's false, it's not knowable since you can't prove the negative.
Agnostics rule.
No, they're now an invasive species in much of the world, crowding out useful cognition and generally being a nuisance.
But his name was Josef Gottsdamm before, and he was a plumber from Sheissburg.
It's dumber than that. Our window of identifiable radio wave communication is likely to be less than 2 centuries, after which it'll look like background noise (i.e. max entropy encryption/compression). We should be looking for possible artifacts, unusually large radio signatures, spores on Earth or in orbit that might be artificial, stellar objects that are accelerating or decelerating for no obvious reason, large objects radiating dimly in infrared like a dyson sphere, and so on.)
Another problem is recognizing intelligence. Here on Earth, if moss had developed advanced mathematical and philosophical intelligence, but only communicated chemically, used a binary code that was chemically, but not "neurologically" mediated, used no tools obvious to us, and mostly discussed problems in soil chemistry, how would we know? We could be looking at intelligence, but never see it.
I mean, if that's all you saw from us, what would you conclude?
1) Finances the CIA and similar organizations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_and_Contras_cocaine_trafficking_in_the_US)
2) Keeps banks and probably financial companies afloat via laundering: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/02/western-banks-colombian-cocaine-trade?newsfeed=true
3) Manages to roll its way into congressional campaigns (http://tomflocco.com/fs/FBILinguist.htm)
So... don't expect rational legalization anytime soon.