Okay,
    So how does that differ from a chinese worker or a robot taking jobs? Trying to hold back technology because of the fear of what it may do is self defeating in the long and probably short run. Currently, education, connections, money all contribute to an unfair job market anyway. Those that are in "secure" positions don't want to rock the boat, yadda, yadda yadda.

The truth is that eventually something will give and we'll see things work out for the betterment of everyone and not just a few. For those that are interested in pursuing a sharper mind, more productivity, more insight, I say go for it. Like another poster said, we don't know where our next invention is coming from and personally I'm all for clearing the way for innovation which includes helping those that innovate any way possible.

I don't really think these drugs will help those that don't put the time forth to become better by training their minds to learn. I think the good ol' boy network will do it's best to keep these folks down, but eventually someone will recognize those that take their brains seriously and hire them. Look at Google and it's PhD program. Too many times in computer science those that have a master's degree are more highly sought than those with PhD's. It's like folks don't recognize the effort behind going the extra yard, or for some reason don't want it. Inferiority complex? I don't know but Google seems to have done well so far valuing those that value their minds/education. Once people see an effect they will all probably jump on the drug bandwagon, but they won't have the mental skills that it takes so the checkbox for doing drugs will be as meaningless as it is now.

You've lost me there. I'm not sure that I trust any theory at the moment as far as brain responses go, but I'm willing to examine new data if you have a few articles on the matter that you care to post I'll read them.

Selective memory more than likely. There are plenty of jobs that don't focus on time stamps today, I'd say even more than used to be. That being said, the talent pool for computer jobs has expanded so I assume there are more people to fill those positions so some places might be more stringent than they used to be.

IBM definitely has gone the other way, where they used to have a strict dress code and time requirements, that has relaxed significantly over the last 20-30 years. AT&T is a totally different company where some divisions are more strict and others less so than they used to be. Other companies I know of are hit and miss. Without doing a full research project and without numbers from years gone by, I think your impression is more based on the jobs you see around you than the market as a whole. Perhaps someone somewhere has done this research, but I haven't seen anything mentioned.

Sorry but what?
      As far as I know brain workings are still experimental, but you are saying that there always has to be a negative along with a positive. That somehow doesn't sound correct, in fact it sounds more like intelligent design than evolution. Evolution isn't smart, it just randomly affects things, some things work, some don't it doesn't have a mind to "balance" anything. Saying that there has to be a trade off for getting the mind to operate better, is the same as saying, we shouldn't cure cancer because people will just die of something else. Or even, we shouldn't educate people because we will suppress their own natural intelligence.

As to the main article, personally I couldn't care less if others are able to make themselves smarter, having more people smarter than me would be a boon. I assume the article is trying to say that norms shouldn't be taking drugs because it gives them an unfair advantage, but I would think the only people that would care about that are those that want to compete with others and probably unfairly. I don't care if John is smarter than me, if he is more productive, doesn't that help me in the long run?

Hmmm?
      Real sysadmins in general are paid more than the programmers. Sure the hotshot program leads get paid more, but a non-toy os sysadmin makes decent money.

That may be for some firms, but when it becomes endemic to the entire industry is what I was trying to point out.

No, 2 is a lie, it does not exist.

Ummm, just a point. Experience can be had by working on various projects online. Experience may be slower than if you have someone directly training you, but the same goes for book learning. I feel they can both be accomplished it's just a matter of putting in the time.

The problem of course is most employers don't know enough to ask the right questions from prospective employees. And with the glut of CS majors that have been turned out, they don't have time to have someone knowledgeable look at each candidate so they try to whittle down the prospectives by requiring a degree. Probably not the best solution to the issue, but that's the way it is. Figure out how to effectively interview candidates and things might have a chance to correct themselves, but failing that the majority of employers are going to use a college degree as a way of limiting the number of applicants they have to look at.

The issue with degrees really began in 2001 when the Tech crash happened. Before that individuals would review your skills, after the tech crash there were too many "IT" guys and so we got thrown to HR would sorts based on bullet lists. Before the tech crash I had 15 calls or so a month and could expect to be offered positions at least 3 times a quarter, usually more. After the tech crash, I went six months without a call. The difference was too dramatic for anything else to change, my skills didn't change that much and the need for those skills was still out there.

One point of contention with your comment. Although a lot of schools may be like that and a large portion of classes may be as well, memorization isn't going to get you through a lot of the upper level classes in computer science. In other degrees possibly, but with computer science there is a large degree of applied skills and thinking outside the box that you just don't get elsewhere.

In addition to that, being about to do a search on any piece of code that strikes the instructor as hokey, means that copy and paste coding should be caught fairly easily. Now, I know that there are a lot of lazy professors out there and teaching associates, but it only takes one in the four years someone is attending school for their practices to be caught and computer science departments are small enough that everyone knows everyone at the professor level, perhaps even at the graduate level.

For myself, I have the opposite problem, I have a terrible memory, can't memorize a thing. Applied CS is where I shine, it's other courses like musical appreciation and even calculus where I have my problems. In computer science the memorization is at the lower levels, once you reach the upper level courses most of them are not about memorization, most, but about applied skills.

Keep in mind, we are also talking about CS not CIS. CIS is programming, CS is all about the algorithms though I suspect most CS majors go into programming, I really think that's about colleges making money turning out CS majors. I'm there for a "real" CS degree so that I can work on the science not be a programmer.

Certificates are not worth much when everyone can get them and the layman business owner doesn't know which ones are valuable and which ones are not. It's interesting to see how the business environment is changing, but while working as an employee required certs, degrees, etc. In general working as a consultant is all about the referral system, ie who you know and knows you. Put together a portfolio of your work and attend networking events in your area should help. The certifications that some people expect are for business types that are in the industry and have HR screening applicants. Selling your own skills to business owners is all about references, recommendations and what you can show them of your work.

No, you don't have to have anything to make incorporation a good idea. Debts from the business will follow you no matter what you do if you don't incorporate. Get sued, spend the rest of your life paying. Make a mistake, spend the rest of your life paying. et cetra The fact of the matter is that incorporating is the cheapest form of legal protection you can buy. Anyone running a business without it is a fool and likely to get burned unless they get very lucky. I

I'm not sure of the current job market, but in years past while a masters increased earning potential, getting a PhD actually paid less. Most consultants work with a Masters degree whereas those that want to do research and "interesting" stuff generally go on to get a PhD. Business sells, research does not, in the past at least. To get interesting work you generally need to pay more for the education and receive less income.

That being said, I am working on getting my PhD in order to teach computer science at the University level. It's more about job satisfaction than income for me.

Very cool