Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:God I wish we'd stop hearing this myth. (Score 1) 366

by Ol Olsoc (#49356941) Attached to: Millennial Tech Workers Losing Ground In US

Exactly. And I see the same happening over here with teaching "critical thinking". It's important, but it got turned into the idea that questioning everything makes one a critical thinker. A college professor in history once told me he gave a guest lecture at a high school. The kids kept challenging him on points during his lecture, and at the end of class, the regular teacher proudly noted how critical the children were and didn't take everything from an authority figure at face value. To which the professor replied: "Yes, but it's a shame they know bugger all about history".

As usual, they get it wrong. Critical thinking is not contradicting everything someone tells you. Critical thinking is to not take everything you are told as gospel, but to do a little research if need be. And if you can make an informed rebuttal, have at it. If you cannot, you sit there politely and take notes.

Constantly interrupting a learned professor is not critical thinking, it is being rude little cynical fucks. The key word is thinking. And they are not.

Comment: Re:God I wish we'd stop hearing this myth. (Score 1) 366

by Ol Olsoc (#49355227) Attached to: Millennial Tech Workers Losing Ground In US

Giving positive reinforcement when it is not deserved ("everyone gets a trophy") reinforces negative behavior that did not achieve the desired outcome. This works in childhood where adults can create closed environments but falls apart when faced with cold, hard reality.

Which all ties in with the movement to keep children as children for longer and longer time. That 25 year childhood thing we've heard about.

Do not allow them to experience adulthood iuntil the last possible moment.


I've already hear rumblings about 35 year childhoods, including a TED talk where some Blackhawk was trying to say that women are not physically ready to have children until they are around 35 years old.

Which sounds like denial of millions of years of evolution, when women are capable of having children , but for some weird reason they are not really ready until almost 15 years after puberty, at a time when their ancestors were grandparents, and could expect only a few more years of life.

There are very good reasons to hold off for a few years. We live much longer, and some social improvements can be had, plus there is more education to be gained. but trying to enforce endless childhood is so anathemic to allowing our children to experience life, the good and the bad, that I consider it abuse. We do not live forever, despite what some think.

My adult life versus my childhood, is more enjoyable by orders of magnitude, Why would I be so protective as to deny my children that? In the end, thebad stuff will be out their when we cut th eumbilicall cord at 25, 35, or if we make this some sort of last generation of permanent parents and permanent children.

Comment: Re:But! (Score 1) 366

by Ol Olsoc (#49354229) Attached to: Millennial Tech Workers Losing Ground In US

Incompetence and only be fully developed and utilized to its maximum potential if it is paired with arrogance, as otherwise people could utilize undesirable insights into their own skills (or rather lack thereof) as motivator to increase their competence level. One of the tried-and-true ways of establishing arrogance is fostering high self-esteem that is not founded in accomplishments, but in the believe that everybody can and should regard themselves as highly valuable, regardless of whether they have actually accomplished something.

Whew! That's quotable. Well done, sir, well done.

Comment: Re:But! (Score 1) 366

by Ol Olsoc (#49354189) Attached to: Millennial Tech Workers Losing Ground In US

That was a year ago. I haven't even made an attempt to contact other recruiters, because I'm terrified of it happening again. Terrified of making myself look like an idiot and wasting everyone's time (recruiters talk, they say). My life is slipping by. The hole in my work history is growing. Sometimes I feel angry. If only they would give me a chance to get my foot in the door. Let me work for pennies, hell, I'd even work for free at this point.

Okay, there is also something else going on here than self esteem. I won't offer the usual and stupid "grow a set" advice. Have you talked to someone about this? It sounds like you have developed such a fear of failure that theat is the first thing you do. My Mother in law had a fear of getting lost, and she always got lost immediately.

Back to you, your fear of failure needs to be harnessed in a positive fashion. And you have got ot figure out how to make that happen. On a personal level, I really really hate "catching hell", so I've compensated for it by trying to do a job much better than needed when possible.

We all fail, I wen't through a number of jobs early on, was laid off from all of them. It sucks, but the day after , we're still here. But you might want to talk to someone about his, fear of failure is very painful, and ends up in a positive feedback loop.

Comment: Re:God I wish we'd stop hearing this myth. (Score 1) 366

by Ol Olsoc (#49353797) Attached to: Millennial Tech Workers Losing Ground In US

Dumping on people does not make them better. Study after study has shown how fragile children's psychs are and how important positive reinforcement is. But hey, it's a lot more fun to be a dick and crush everyone you see.

You apparently have self esteem and self worth all wrong. Every person on earth has high self worth.

And the present day choice you give of high self esteem or crushing all children's egos is a false dilemma. The "self esteem" movement teach that the individual child that they are great, and that they are special, without the need for anything afterward. So they go though their education, believing they are the center of the universe, then find themselves in the real world with that fragile psyche just as vulnerable as when they were little.

I've seen it in the workplace too often.

And so many of them crash and burn when they find out that the real world is not about having their egos stroked, and that Facebook is not a job duty, and that you don't get a promotion after you've been there for 2 months and came in on time. Or that the other older folks are there to serve them. Then they quit and move back with mommy and daddy. The helicoptering parent's ultimate achievement. A lifelong child.

Self-esteem is an earned commodity, earned through effort and accomplishment. Forcing high self esteem on children, who usually haven't accomplished much yet, gives them a completely messed up view of the world. I have really high self esteem because I've accomplished some things in life. But I don't think I'm the center of the universe, nor do I think I need daily congratulations for getting my shoes tied.

Comment: Re:pointless (Score 1) 97

They're talking about a Distant Retrograde Orbit (which are stable over a century) in the earth-moon plane at 47,000 miles above moon.

Oy - I was hoping it was clear I was being really sarcastic, but I did not know specifics about the orbit they were thinking of, so thanks for that bit of info.

Comment: Re:Emacs versus vi again? (Score 1) 197

by Ol Olsoc (#49344985) Attached to: Pixar Releases Free Version of RenderMan

Surely a professional is going to be able to pick up how to use different software quickly enough that's it's going to make little difference in the long run which one they started with?

I suppose you could give it a try to see. My experience shifting from Imagine to Lightwave was not too terrible. But that was around 1992, when 3D wasn't as developed.

But I grew with Lightwave, the incremental changes from version to version allowed incremental learning. Got pretty fair with it.

Now into Maya, the interface is different, the different effects are handled completely differently. It's very good though. I'm not yet.

All to say that if I had a commercial job come in now, I'd fall back to Lightwave.

To work efficiently in 3-D, you pretty much have to have the commands committed to muscle memory, just like other programs, only amped up a lot. If 3-D is simple for you, you might have a career path in front of you. A lot of people who are a lot smarter than me lose their minds while watching me work. It ain't excel, it ain't even Photoshop.

And stop calling me Shirley! ;^)

Comment: Re:pointless (Score 2) 97

yeah, tools like you who are smarter than the rocket scientists. And, your notion of sending a 200 lb astronaut with another 20,000 lbs of support vehicle being "easier" than sending a 2000 lb satellite is just baffling.

Let's chat about orbital mechanics and the space environment.

Oh yeah, 1) we don't have to bring the satellite back

So did we get some sort of Star Trek Transporter technology? Or we're just going to tell the samples to get on over to earth? I suspect that if you did d want the asteroid to be looked at (a big assumption - I suspect you don't) you have a grossly inflated expectations of the capabilities of satellite based chemical analysis. Ever been in a real chem lab?

you're making a stupid, stupid assumption that the "boulder" will actually be monolithic and not shed pieces under the tidal forces. You're likely to be wrong.

Wow. Two stupids. Okay, first thing is that we've got this awesome new technology called bags Usually they have a hole at one end, and they are kind of closed up at the other. So if we wanted to snare and send back a crumbly Carbonaceous asteroid, we'd probably put a bag around it. Some bags are pretty darn big too. Still, we don't have to bring back Vesta, you know.

Second thing, we might pick and choose among the asteroids. The nickle-iron ones are of mining interest, and are darned solid. The carbonaceous ones are of great interest to scientists, and the silicate ones are probably of least interest - but who knows?

In the end, this is an exercise in so many different things, snagging, transporting, probably extraction methods, research and development, its a real winner.

And your non-problem problems just show how some have to grasp at straws to find reasons to oppose it.

Comment: Re:Ugly Solution (Score 2) 192

by Ol Olsoc (#49344497) Attached to: Japan To Build 250-Mile-Long, Four Storey-High Wall To Stop Tsunamis

I'm sure politicians, and not Engineers are deciding this.

Absolutely. And when Politicians and their Excel enabled lackeys - the bean counters - get involved, you'll find thatThere will be studies and presentations to show now much money will be saved by making the wall X feet shorter.

A very good example of this is the fencing systems along American interstate highways. Supposed to keep deer and other big animals away. Some one with more power than brains made the decision to save money, and made the fences shorter. Too bad the deer can jump over it. Rather than blocking them, it's just like an exercise programs for the ones that don't get disintegrated.

Prudence demands that you use historical evidence of the highest Tsunami. There are gravel lines all over the coast that are physical evidence, Then you add in a safety factor. Then you build, without the bean counters telling you to lop off a few feet.

But people haven't changed since the days when Fukushima was built, with a seawall that was lower than expected Tsunami waves. I was shocked when my research showed that the facility being swamped was not only possible, but simply was going to happen. The evidence both in the historical and geological record said so.

BTW - I'd suggest that they might think about release gates to let the breachwater back out after the wall is topped because of cost saving measures.

"Mr. Watson, come here, I want you." -- Alexander Graham Bell