Re: Ridiculous costs of "higher education"
- From: el cid <elcidbivar@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 10:09:38 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 30, 11:08 pm, James Beck <jdbeck11...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 03:10:51 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans
James Beck <jdbeck11...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 17:30:30 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans
In talk.origins James Beck <jdbeck11...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
And here I thought that he was making the usual impassioned plea for a
return to the good old days when a few hundred or thousand computer
geeks could earn outrageous monopoly rents. Oh wait...
And even in computing you get what you pay for.
That suits me just fine. OTOH, the gift culture folks say that you
also get a lot that you didn't pay for.
Anyway, the genie was worming his way out of the bottle once they
started teaching computer programming to junior and senior high school
kids. The PC loosened the cork a bit further. Microsoft uncorked the
bottle most of the rest of the way (even if you did have to use
WinAPI). Now the benefits flow to anyone who can figure out a way to
get paid. If you find a nice barrier to entry to hide behind, you can
still do pretty well. How long that will last remains to be seen;
there are plenty of smart programmers outside the US.
Yes there are. It is an international occupation.
However, the catastrophe that is most commercial and a fair
amount of open source software indicates that good programmers
Sadly, as Dilbert illustrates, most companies couldn't recognize
a good programmer under any conditions.
In my experience, managers behave as if they know who the good
programmers are. That doesn't mean that they will either retain or
promote them. They follow different rationales. For example, Microsoft
is notorious for hiring fresh, current talent, retaining them until
their skills are obsolete then replacing them with new talent. It's a
risky career. Even so, you don't hear most programmers clamoring for
more jobs in COBOL.
Which is why personal information is constantly leaking out of
corporate computers into the hands of not nice folks. And that's
just for starters.
Maybe, but I would be looking more at deliberate theft, sabotage by
disgruntled employees and ignorance of and/or indifference to security
issues, particularly on the lookout for sloppy habits while conducting
personal business on the office machine.
Individual privacy, while important, isn't the main event anyway.
Something like 85%-90% of US critical infrastructure is owned by
private companies. That includes telecom, refineries and nuclear power
Here is an Irish economist discussing all the financial crisis via
3 major causes in a very Irish way.
- Prev by Date: Re: Attacks on philosophy by scientists
- Next by Date: Re: Rogers Revisits the UNsolved Problem of the logical INvalidity of Induction
- Previous by thread: Re: Ridiculous costs of "higher education"
- Next by thread: Re: Ridiculous costs of "higher education"