Comment Re:I don't think so (Score 3, Interesting) 234
Roughly 10% ahead of Canada and losing ground rapidly.
Roughly 10% ahead of Canada and losing ground rapidly.
Haha, no. It is quite elementary that sacrificing market share while increasing prices is a fine recipe for short term gain and long term pain.
America certainly has it's issues but Putin seems determined to turn Russia into a nuclear armed banana republic. Look at this list. Russia, styling itself a great power, has impoverished its people to a state worse than Croatia and 56 other countries. Not far ahead of Botswana. Amazing power, that.
I suppose ass-cheek-cancer *is* probably less horrible. For what it's worth though I've still yet to see any study conclusively linking cell phones to cancer, suggesting that the link is tenuous at best. The strongest link I recall reading of was a link to benign cancers along the auditory nerve, and the correlation was insufficient to make a confident statement that a link existed.
Well until then I think I will err on the side of caution and use speaker phone and a wired earpeice for phone calls. I'd rather limit my exposure and take personal responsibility for my health, than to go through anything like brain cancer. After all an absence of evidence doesn't mean a link isn't there, all it means is no one has funded any science to find *if* a link exists.
It is not only what you want. If you have the required talent, you have a strong moral obligation to become good at using it. Otherwise a technological society collapses.
Typical US ignorance. It is.
While I did my PhD at one of the best technical universities in Europe (and on the planet), I was paid about 60% of an industrial salary. Doing a PhD and not getting paid enough to live off it decently is pure insanity. Of course you have some teaching duties (40% in my case), but you learn a lot there too, like presenting stuff and speaking in front of a group. Invaluable in basically any technical job on advanced level.
The British are not really part of Europe...
In most of Europe, you do not need a car, because they have something called "public transportation" that, unlike in almost all of the US, does not suck. Example: Here the longest distance to the next stop (city area, 350'000 inhabitants) is 200m, and during the day its one Bus/Tram every 7 minutes. A car is completely redundant. Instead use the Bus or Tram ride to read, something you do all the time as a student anyways.
Indeed. And if you chose the right one, you also get solid command of a second language out of that, an invaluable asset if you want to do anything international.
That is a road not many can take without sucking badly (and most that take this road do indeed suck badly, many of them do not know it). High-quality education is what allows you to stand on the shoulders of giants. No amount of talent can replace that. In fact, talent is orthogonal to it. You need both to be good.
I do know a number of people in the CS field that had abbreviated educations (BS only) or educations with the wrong focus point (economics, then they were doing IT security work) and that invested in more (MA, PhD in one case). All say that it was very much worth their while. All also say that they could not even see or only very fuzzily see what they were missing before.
A society where somebody looking to get an education can be reduced to that sucks on a very fundamental level. Doing education right takes everything a person has. Adding economic survival to that is just plain wrong and also plain stupid economically. Maybe one of the reasons the US imports so many H1B workers: The domestic talent seems to find it far to difficult to get a good education. A country the size of the US should not have any shortage of highly talented, skilled and educated people. Yet it has.
Indeed. Everything you learn that you are interested in that is. That is one of the main reason to advise people to learn something they have a passion for. The ones doing things for the money will not get a lot of mileage out of their "learning" as it will not become part of who they are and hence they will never be good at it will not stay long with them. That is also a reason why everybody that finds they cannot find passion for a subject to change the subject.
Sure, at the end of the day you have to find some way to make enough money from what you learned to live off it. But you can either live in hell, doing a job you hate and no amount of money will ever compensate for that (although many people think it does). Or you can do something that you at lest love parts of and that you are good at. That usually does not make you rich, but unless you are really unlucky, it should be enough to live decently off it. Just remember that working is what takes most of your awake-time. Making that time more agreeable is very much worthwhile.
Thus spake the master programmer: "After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"