Just look at how well that trickle-down theory worked during the war...

Put another way, who benefited more, the workers or the board of Halliburton?

Yeah, there's a tech glut in the area, which makes it just that much harder for a deaf guy to find work in the field.

There's a major manufacturer already using pads for their motherboards. It ships with laptop motherboard replacements. It's a pain-in-the ass to work with, peels from the backing tape badly, and is a lot LESS convenient (for me) than thermal goo.

It's all fun and games until John de Lancie gets abducted in one...

....aaaand that's why we have Fox News...

Yeah, try "Phoenix, Arizona"...

Since it's been a legal requirement for them to pass-through captioning/subtitling that's already been done, this isn't nearly the burden you think it is. In fact, for the last 5 years, all new TV material has been *required* to have captioning ( with a very few exceptions), so Netflix isn't going to have pay to have all their material redone.

True. I earned $14k per year stipend in graduate school, plus $6k per summer grading a summer-school course. I opted for that instead of a more lucrative summer internship.

So for the 2.5 years of graduate school I earned $20k per year instead of around $56k, so if it was $6k extra per year then I'm at break-even next year. If it was an extra $8k instead (since I am estimating) I was at break even a while ago.

Are you part of the interviewing process where you work? I am, and while I can't say what HR or our recruiter might do, I often don't even look at the part of the resume that lists where a candidate was educated, except for curiosity. I still need a candidate to prove to me that s/he can program and can think, and their educational source is only tangentially related in my experience.

My colleagues have interviewed new college graduates in CS who don't know big-O notation. That's a pre-requisite for understanding P versus NP. Though to be fair, there's a broad swath of problems one can solve for an employer where the algorithms don't reach that combinatoric complexity, and the data sets aren't large enough to make O(n^2) with low constants worse too often compared to O(n lg n) with high constants.

The value for me of a course-based M.S. (dropout from a PhD program) was $6000 per year starting salary. That's a pretty decent bump that I likely kept with me my whole career, as raises tend to be percentage based. So after 11 years it may have been worth at least $66k.

Oh, and also I learned a bunch of stuff in those courses I hadn't yet learned as an undergrad. To my recollection, none of the specific things has been relevant to my job, but it is sometimes hard to tell.

I, as a interviewer, won't be "fooled". But since I work with some brilliant software people who never got a college degree, it won't necessarily be a barrier to getting at least a phone interview. If the interviewee knows their stuff, it doesn't matter how they learned it.

I mean, with someone who has 20 years experience, do you care if they went to Harvard, Stanford, or the University of Kansas? Of course not, you care if they're smart and have some relevant skills. A lot of times as an interviewer I don't even care if they have the relevant skills (i.e. I work in the storage industry, but candidates don't need to know anything about storage or filesystems to get a job here -- I certainly didn't know that when I started).

As an interviewer I care about two things, essentially: can you think, and do you understand some CS theory? If you can do the first but don't know the second, you can still get a job, we just won't start you as a senior level engineer.

It may be U.S. only (I hope so!) Others can talk all they want about "well-rounded" but the economic reality is that English, History, etc., courses do not produce graduates who earn more money. And so the only way those departments survive, since they can't on their own merits, is by forcing all students, some of whom *will* increase their earning potential, to take them.

It's pure economics -- there's a bunch of economically useless professors, who have plenty of time to petition the President of the school or the state legislature about why their brand of "well-rounded" is so useful, and thereby gain a fraction of a lot of student's tuition, instead of the very small piece they'd otherwise have.

Now ask yourself this: is college the only time in my life I am able to read classical literature or study art history or any of these other things that somehow make one well-rounded? Of course not. So the idea that one needs to study this in college is ludicrous, except to those departments that don't produce economic value trying to justify their existence.

Agreed. As a news junkie, /. is just a little too slow with new stories, too.

Ah, I found the relevant wikipedia article. I remember now that we never shipped a 6.0 (another marketing ploy since no one runs the .0 version) and jumped straight to 6.1. It seems that with the new clustering and such technology they jumped again to 7.1 instead of 6.2. The version numbering makes no sense! But that didn't change in the 7 years I worked there.