Getting kids into coding is like getting them interested in meat packing or textiles -- industries which are career dead ends. No business hires domestic programmers anywhere, especially when a call to Tata can get guaranteed results for a fraction of what a full time employee would cost, not to mention the other benefits (smaller payroll tax, less building space needed, one less employee that you have to worry about suing at a drop of a hat.)
Instead, get them interested in what matters: Debate, accounting, business, finance. It would be nice to even have a class that discusses critical court cases and encourages legal research. These are majors that once they are in college, they might have a hope of feeding themselves and paying back student loans.
Last college job fair I went to, the only people recruiting CS majors in the US, was the Army for enlistees, and you don't even get a choice of MOS, unless 11X is your choice.
You are the one that is deluded. You think programming is a dead end, yet you hold debate, accounting, business, finance in high regard. Have you worked in all these areas? Neither Have I. One should pick a academic route that interests them and fits their personality type.
... NOT being distracted by Facebook and Twitter. Good thing those and the whole internet were not around back then.
Distractions have existed long before facebook, twitter and the internet, like videogames
I thought, yes, normal, but skewed, but it is really an artifact of the categories that were chosen. The central category, since there's an odd number, should be really neutral, but it is in fact "leaning toward messy", whereas the *actually neutral* category "neither especially" is to the 'neat' side of the center.
completely agree with you. the poll could have been designed better. the way it was designed makes it useless for inference. the middle category should've been neutral. statistical fail.
This is an awesomely normal (as in stats)-looking distribution! The mean makes sense - leaning towards messy. Or maybe that's how everyone views themselves but it's not an objective measure (cf. up to 80% of people thinking they are above average drivers).
your half right, it looks like a normal dist. but its pretty skewed towards neatness. the more a normal dist. is skewed the less the mean means (see what i did there? please mod me up my karma is bad!)
the percentage spread between pro and con arguments is not totally convincing one way or another - certainly not at the p<0.05 confidence level we typically use.
statistical hypothesis testing has absolutely no place in the area of subjective opinion, especially if you dont say what the null hypothesis is. by the way a significance level of 0.05 is very lenient...
The pedal orientation is not switched in RHD cars.
Also, most of Europe is LHD, only the UK is RHD.
ireland is also RHD, mr informative
it will be necessary for probably 50-100 years before we can fully finish converting to entirely renewable sources.
50-100 years? im sorry but thats a pretty big assumption there. Because of conservatism that comes hand in hand with power, the use of fossil fuels will be perpetuated for as long as possible. even if and when man has the capability of converting entirely to renewables, there should still be non-renewable sources kept as backup for unforseen situations.
The *only* way nuclear is 'good' is that its less bad than coal in terms of greenhouse gases. No more.
no more? just because it isnt as advanced right now as we'd like it to be doesn't mean its isnt bad. accidents and lazy/stupid/cheapskate governments/private companies give nuclear a bad name. i would much prefer to live beside a nuclear power station than a power station running on fossil fuels.
Help fight continental drift.
