Wouldn't it be nice to have some form of "free speech" which, if guarded carefully, would (...) consider the reputation of a source alongside its content.
You mean like the slashdot commenting system? Who would be the moderators?
the creepy part is the car knowing your health and determining whether it would be more fit to drive than you.
In this case I disagree. The creepy part is that all those intoxicated and fatigued people still take their car. This kind of techonology should not be necessary but clearly it is.
- the "windows" type of user friendliness makes easy things easy and everything else hard or impossible. The software decides what is best for you.
- the "linux" type of user friendliness makes easy things a little bit harder and everything else possible. You decide what is best for you and your computer follows your instructions exactly if you talk to it in the right language
Compare this to a coffee machine:
- Machine 1 has a single button and makes reasonable espresso when you push it. EASY! But it is not possible to adjust the water temperature and the grain size
- Machine 2 has the potential to make excellent espresso, but it obviously requires more maintenance: someone needs to set the grain size of the coffee, the water temperature, etc. Most people will get their settings wrong and blame the machine. Is it arrogant of developers to think that these people are incompetent? No, it's the truth (they may be good at other things not related to coffee but that is besides the point here).
So what is the point? Linux and Windows are different and have a different purpose. Linux can behave like windows (Ubuntu comes close, which is why I do not use it) but Windows can not behave like Linux and it does not want to. There is no need to compare because it is not a competition. Each of them suits its purpose and the article above states that for this particular purpose Windows is more suitable. Great.
2. Screen for the disease as requested, and only give this information to the doctor
3. Keep the data in case more questions are asked
4. You can thank me later
I don't see a problem. A patient undergoes a DNA test to answer a
- code complete
- design patterns
After that of course you need practice.
By the way, it is worth it and makes code more easily reusable because it allows to make small changes to existing code more easily. Although this does not teach you to use frameworks, the logic of thinking in patterns and how to do object oriented programming properly is a very good start.
If you care about money, it is not worth it. But you probably should not have done a PhD either.
If you care about science, a postdoc is ABSOLUTELY GREAT! You will never in your scientific carreer have the opportunity to do so much work by yourself. As soon as you become a lecturer/professor/whatever equivalent your country has you will have to write grant proposals, go to conferences, teach, etc. all getting in the way of science. Given the choice (read: if I can afford it) I take a postdoc position any day above any other academic place.