Why can't you just buy it, and own it, and use it how you like? Or... not buy the damn thing. It's supposed to be entertainment, not work, not some sort of interactive customer experience with Microsoft.
Take a large helping of 'duh', sprinkle on some crisis mentality, garnished with a little fascism, and served up by a population programmed to trade freedom for security.
We'll nationalize the power grid in less than 20 years.
Fail. There is no technical reasons for patents in the first place.
Legally, I see no benefit to society to be able to patent what can be accomplished in software if it's just a simple conversion from software logic into solder. What's so inventive about that and why should other people be prevented to come up with the same idea?
Then again, what real benefit does a patent even on a mechanical device actually give to society? Supposedly what you have is a trade off of somebody publishing detailed information about a device (like a light bulb, an airplane, or a phonograph... all have received patents in one form or another over the years) in exchange for getting exclusive rights to manufacture that device.
As a practical matter, the patent system of today really doesn't help out in terms of helping a private individual to be able to have that sort of market exclusivity or even get their idea brought to market at all. The patent system itself if broken not just for software patents, for for patents of every kind.
The problem with your idea of fixing something in silicon is that anything which can be expressed as a computer program can be "fixed in silicon". I'm not even talking something like programmable logic such as FPGAs and such (which clearly are just as "programmable" as RAM), but that you could even take complex software like an operating system and convert it to purely AND/OR gates. Heck, you could even turn a Mozart symphony into nothing but gates and a speaker and sound better than a live performance.
This is sort of the point of Turing machines in general, as they are that malleable. That is what makes them useful, and substantially blurs the line between software and hardware.
If the device does something which can't be done in software.... you might have a point. There clearly are hardware concepts which can't be done in software except as a pure simulation, but the reverse that anything done in software can be done in hardware should be an axiom. The list of things which can be done in software is pretty large though, so you need to be careful even there.
Stick a bunch of fluorescent lights in the ground nearby and get free light (and suck power from the lines, thank you induction).
Other than SMS, people still use IM? Is the Internet populated solely by 14 year old basement dwellers and 50 year old ASL pervs?
Somehow it was necessary to mention that the budget was affected by sequestration?
With population exploding, shouldn't we return to an era where the weak were culled out? With chronic unemployment as the new norm, maybe there's just too many people. It's like managing these "lifestyle" diseases - back in the day old people had the grace to die of diabetes or a heart attack, now they live until 90, but don't work the last 30 years of their lives, effectively eating the seed corn of the new generation. We're soon going to be victims of our own successes.
Is the end goal of life a high salary?
I understand his advice, if followed, and if you work your way, either through trade school or apprenticeship, to journeyman, and then to master, you can expect a $80K+ a year income.
Is this the end-all, be-all of human existence?
A high salary is not why I went into the sciences - I went in with a passion for knowledge and knowing how things work, and why, and how to build things that, because they were barely within the boundaries of the rules, did amazing and astonishing things. A high salary resulted because I was successful at pursuing this passion.
I would instead advise people to try to find three things for which they feel passion, and are good at, and then find someone willing to pay you to do one of them.
If you can only find one thing for which you have passion, if you can still find someone to pay you to do it, then you are ahead of the game, compared to what Bloomberg suggest, if it happens that none of your objects of passion include plumbing.
There are plenty of people who look at the top end paychecks available in a profession, and choose a profession on that basis. Those who do will never reach the top end of that pay range if they do not posses a passion for the profession; they will always be middle tier, and they will watch the clock until it is time to check out from their job, and "get back to their 'real' life". This is where a lot of unemployed IT "professionals" come from.
For those clock watching 8 hours of their day, they will be miserable, working at something for which they have no passion, having intentionally turned their soul off for those eight hours in exchange for money. They will sell half their waking life into misery to benefit the other half of their waking life. And at the end of the day in their "real life", they will find they can not take joy in their "real life", as they anticipate, after sleeping, returning to their job for the next 8 soulless hours of work.
Do something you love, and for which you have passion; reclaim your soul for those lost 8 hours of your life.
I have done different things in my career, some of which interests me, and some which did not. Doing "something I love" has not really helped me live a pleasant life and sleep well at night. The main drivers for me are more like:
1. Job is important and has an impact on someone or some thing. There is a purpose which makes me feel needed.
2. Job has progress milestones which are achievable with some work. A job with no noticeable progress is miserable monotony. Likewise, a job with unachievable goals is frustrating.
3. Job has the right mix of travel, hands-on work, desk work, etc for ME.
4. Boss who is fair, sets clear expectations, and is interested in having a "rising tide lift all boats".
5. Being financially secure. This includes good health insurance. I sleep a lot better at night now that my income is significantly more than my needs. I can worry about the things that matter and not the fluctuations in my bank account.
The first 4 have been proven over and over in psychology studies to make people happier. Doing "something you love" means that I make my hobbies into a job. It is a good way to become sick of both and then be miserable.
I teach engineering at a maritime academy and it dazzles me that so many students pay through the nose and suffer through 4+ years of regimented academics for a license that they could get by just sailing as a paid vessel assistant for a few years after high school and taking a Coast Guard examination. This is a practice called hawsepiping and used to be the norm for the profession. Marine engineers are really (for the most part) mechanics, and much simpler vocational school would be more than adequate for these jobs. Admittedly the students also get a "marine engineering degree" over and above the training for the license that is transferrable to a lot of shore-side professions, but most of that is lost on the students. All they care about is getting the license and many whine and cry about having to read, write, do math, and take engineering coursework. I do think that degree is worth what they pay, but it really a form of insurance so they can remain employed after they come ashore, and getting 20 year old boys who aspire to be sailors to think about what they are going to do later in life (hell, later in the *day*) is hard.
Better tighten that onion on your belt. Meeting the STCW-95 requirements would be really tough without a dedicated educational/hand-on program. Working your way up from AB or wiper is for masochists. It could be done, but it is a far harder path for the same result. It is a throwback to the time when people had careers and pensions. Now people have jobs and need to change companies frequently. The marine industry is no different than any other industry today- no company wants to pay to train anybody, they want to hire someone who has all the certifications and experience already, and they don't want to pay a dime more than they have to in salary.
I do think that the standard 3rd mate/3rd engineer track could be shortened to 3 or even 2 years, but at that point it becomes Training rather than an Education (and as an instructor, you should appreciate the difference). In-state Maritime Academy is one of the best purchases I ever made. It is truly a bargain when you look at all the idiots spending $40k a year to become English majors.
I really disagree with your statement that " Admittedly the students also get a "marine engineering degree" over and above the training for the license that is transferrable to a lot of shore-side professions, but most of that is lost on the students. All they care about is getting the license...". It wasn't that long ago that I was in school. 2/3 of my classmates wanted to graduate, get their license, start jobs, and get on with their lives. The license is just a tool for them to get there. Only about half of my license-bearing classmates were still shipping out after 5 years. Everybody knows that shipping out is a marriage-killer and a poor way to raise kids. The degree is not a fallback plan if the license doesn't pan out for some reason. The coast guard license opens only a handful of doors (albeit important ones). The degree is a piece of paper that opens many kinds of doors.
You fail, both for being retarded, and for signing your post.
Typical modern groupthink - if you dont match up to some artificial social standard you lose. Watch your own checkbook, don't chase some mythical metric that others self-report. You'll never win, they'll just keep moving the goalposts. Spend less money as you expand capacity, and you're doing a good job.
The Pele of Anal?