Why would this be at all relevant, even if true?

It took until I was 30 years old for me to recover from the damage done to my love of learning as a child.

Let me know when you recover from blaming other people for your problems. Perhaps when you're 45?

I went through a similar experience. School was largely busywork, even in the gifted program. However it didn't take much to see that any work at any level anyone would be willing to give me is going to be the same. So I simply did the minimum required and turned my attentions to other things that interested me.

This caused problems when the work actually started to become challenging.. My issue, and probably yours was not having a coping strategy for busywork (assuming this was actually the problem). My coping mechanism was clearly better than yours but with a little more parental involvement I probably could have avoided the whole mess.

Ultimately though it was my decision not to simply push through the busywork and get the job done.

Busywork is a significant part of any job almost regardless of payscale. Meetings are busywork, charting is busywork. Strategy sessions are busywork. Recording results is busywork. Reading and signing documents is busywork.

As a parent even teaching your children is pretty close to busywork. It's always miles below your ability and often repetitive.

In fact given your rant above, you come off sounding like someone who has to be constantly stimulated in your job. Which to your supervisor sounds a lot like we have to be constantly working to keep you entertained. No offense but I'll just hire the next guy who can handle being bored from time to time without blaming me for destroying his "love of work"

It took until I was 30 years old for me to recover from the damage done to my love of learning as a child. Let me know when you recover from blaming other people for your problems. Perhaps when you're 45. I went through a similar experience. School was largely busywork, even in the gifted program. However it didn't take much to see that any work at any level anyone would be willing to give me is going to be the same. So I simply did the minimum required and turned my attentions to other things that interested me. This did cause problems when the work actually started to be challenging and ended up causing problems. My issue, and probably yours was not having a coping strategy for busywork (assuming this was actually the problem). My coping mechanism was clearly better than yours but with a little more parental involvement I probably could have avoided the whole mess. Ultimately though it was my decision not to simply push through the busywork and get the job done. Busywork is a significant part of any job almost regardless of payscale. Meetings are busywork, charting is busywork. Strategy sessions are busywork. Recording results is busywork. Reading and signing documents is busywork. As a parent even teaching your children is pretty close to busywork. It's always miles below your ability and often repetitive. In fact given your rant above, you come off sounding like someone who has to be constantly stimulated in your job. Which to your supervisor sounds a lot like we have to be constantly working to keep you entertained. No offense but I'll just hire the next guy who can handle being bored from time to time without blaming me for destroying his "love of work"

"read up" funny. Is there some group of formal texts on the subject you'd like to reference? In my experience people use the term to refer to series of events for which one initial event necessitates the others (or makes near certain). The fallacy exists due to the assumption of the necessity of the chain of events. So the poster appears to be saying if you allow government to restrict any aspect of your life due to safety then it's near certain that it will restrict some specific other aspect of your life will be restricted on the grounds of safety. This is untrue by virtue of there existing specific aspects of my life which remain unrestricted or unrestricted on the basis of safety..

LD50 for ascorbic acid in rats: 11900 mg/kg That's an insane amount and impossible to ingest for the vast majority of folk.

No theoretical argument can be evidence for the reality or unreality of phenomena, no matter how well-formed.

Well i) That's a theoretical argument making an imposition on reality and ii) your wrong as I hear that you can't write a computer program which deterministically can predict if an arbitrary computer program will halt.

Actually yeah there is an exceptional amount of correlation between what you eat and a few variables about you and your resulting weight. BMR can be reasonably reliably derived from age, sex, weight, height. If people really were so radically different you couldn't actually create a regression from the data (or the coefficients would be small or align by chance). There are lots of things which can affect weight gain but they are all needfully small compared to your caloric input vs your BMR + the energy you use day-to-day.

I always wonder why people say this. It's unclear exactly how much of what Apple produced was Jobs's idea and how much help he had. We probably will never know since it's currently in Apple's best interest to keep the myth alive.

Think so? I think when a prophet dies is a sign that the wars are on their way

Yes, Dijkstra's old saw "Computer Science has as much to do with computers as Astronomy has to do with Telescopes" and it's true to a point but there are some fine points worth mentioning. Because CS isn't strictly about coding a CS student should have written code in multiple languages. This is a big deal if you work in a heterogeneous environment. Far, far, far too many "coders" have exactly one thing on their resume: Java. I've seen a number of these people attempt to work in a different environment and fail. At first I found this inexplicable: Was it really so hard for someone to see the commonalities between one programming language and another? Apparently. Another point is because CS isn't strictly about writing code you're going to see people who *plan* their development a little more. Almost any primate can write code but not just anyone knows how to tackle a large project or see how not to code themselves into a corner.

IMHO hire a "coder" if you need specific language expertise or just someone to churn out code. If you need someone who is more broadly skilled then you might do better with a CS grad (of course there's an inherent problem that CS is often used synonymously with "software developer" even in educational programs). Finding someone who has a passion for development is always a plus regardless of their education.

...and make it a useful system for POS. 10 min transaction clearing might be barely tolerable for internet transactions but I'm not interested in waiting for 10 min for my groceries payment to clear. Also 10 min is not necessarily the maximal amount of time as the block chain grows the length of time to get confirmation increases. You can do it in less time by forgoing confirmation but then you lose one of it's primary benefits.

Please. just. die. Just go, get a hammer and hit yourself repeatedly until you stop moving.

Firstly you confuse the point of analyzing cryptography - it's not that X *can* be weaker than *y* - that could be true for just about any two systems. Rather it's a question of the amount of entropy the system delivers. Yes sentences will follow a Markov chain where each word narrows the potential pool of the next word however there is a rather large number of words that can initialize the system *STILL* makes it better than 8 character passwords. However that's ONLY if the person uses a sentence. If it's just a string of five nouns then you're SOL.

Secondly you seem to misunderstand that targeted attacks might narrow the amount of entropy - it also narrows the number of people who can even attempt the attack.

No, not really. It is just a rather impractical way of making a serial number that can't be forged.

Same argument for Mainframes. IBM would fly people out to us when there was an emergency. All this says is that when you can afford it the right hand side of the curve responds very well. Which means you can afford to hire know-nothings (no offense) for your day-to-day work.

I don't think this model fits most businesses. In which case Linux might make more sense. A bright person who works in a Linux environment has far more power to act in an emergency than someone in a Windows environment.

w.r.t Contracts, I've never seen an exclusive one like the OP mentions but I do notice that MS tends to bundle stuff in their site licenses. Our Sharepoint project was begat due to the fact that it was "free".

Now we just make BT look like skype traffic.

True but the alternative is to seek out some kind of bias which people will pretend is meaningful but very likely isn't. In fact it is significantly more likely that the coin toss would reflect the will of the people than some slim majority vote.